The Gandhi Project by Nashid Fareed-Ma’at

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 70, excerpt from Young India, July

14, 1927.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 337 - 338, excerpt from Young

India, March 19, 1931.

161

one gentle shower transforms the plains of India into a beautiful

green carpet in one single day.”

THE SACRED DUTY OF SATYAGRAHA LEADERSHIP

“Satyagraha eschews all make-believe. I have no relish for the

title of the Mahatma given me by the people, if only because I

am unworthy of it but I have given myself a title of which I am

proud. I call myself a Satyagrahi, and so I must live up to it. I

cannot but utter the bitter truth, whenever there is an occasion

for it.”

The above quote presented a very interesting point in regards to Gandhi’s approach to

leadership. He rejected the title of Mahatma (Great Soul) which was, in part, given to him as a

recognized spiritual leader in India. Instead he self-identified as a Satyagrahi and, in many

respects, the cultivation of his leadership qualities were the direct result of his development as a

Satyagrahi: one seeking and living Truth. His rejection of the Mahatma title was also a sign of

his humility: another key element of Gandhi’s approach to leadership. In today’s age, where

leadership is often conflated with (foolish, delusional) pride, his personal example of humble

leadership is a valuable reminder.

Duty has an irrevocable place in Satyagraha, yet this responsibility of duty is multiplied

immensely for those who perform leadership positions in Satyagraha. The measures for purity,

moral fortitude, (soul-based) strength, living ahimsa, progressing toward and holding to Truth,

and more are held to a higher standard for leaders than other participants who will be entrusted

to the guidance of Satyagraha leaders. Gandhi declared:

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 97, excerpt from Harijan, July 23,

1938.

162

“There must be power in the word of a Satyagraha general -- not

the power that the possession of limitless arms gives, but the

power that purity of life, strict vigilance, and ceaseless application

produce.”

Such power requires a person of exceeding moral character and strength, qualities Gandhi

devoted himself to being a living example of.

In many respects, it’s kind of pointless to go into an extended discussion of what a

Satyagraha leader is: if people fulfill much of what has already been covered in this book, they

will naturally grow to become Satyagraha leaders. And there is much within such fulfillment

that allows for a wide range of leadership types, styles, approaches, and personalities. Instead I

will focus on a few essential points that Gandhi highlighted.

Gandhi embraced hierarchal leadership structures, as evidenced in the use of terms such

as “Satyagraha general” (in the above quote), “non-violent army,” and “peace brigade.” His use

of military terms, a personal point of contention I have with him, doesn’t necessarily mean he

utilized such structures in the way destructive and violent forces do. As has been repeated

throughout this book, Gandhi was against all forms of compulsion. Therefore, it would never be

acceptable that a volunteer must perform what a Satyagraha general ordered simply because it

was ordered. Neither should Satyagraha leaders be admired and adored simply because they

hold leadership positions. Leaders have to earn and continuously earn while serving in

leadership positions the cooperation of those Satyagraha workers under them. And I emphasize:

Satyagraha leadership is viewed in the context of service. Gandhi acknowledged certain

characteristics that would allow Satyagraha leaders to meet this dictate.

Based on the premise that Truth is essential to the Satyagraha path, the embodiment of

and alignment with Truth is vital for all Satyagraha leaders. To this point, Gandhi wrote:

“Satyagraha, therefore, best succeeds under the leadership of a true

man of God {Truth} who will compel reverence and love even of

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 203, excerpt from Harijan, May 5,

1939.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 203, excerpt from Harijan, May

27, 1939.

163

the opponent by the purity of his life, the utter selflessness of his

mission and the breadth of his outlook.”

For Gandhi, this placed exceeding importance on the attainment of self-purification among

Satyagraha leaders:

“As with regard to the goal so with the means, unadulterated purity

is of the very essence in this species of Satyagraha. The leader in

such a movement must be a man of deeply spiritual life, preferably

a brahmachari -- whether married or unmarried.”

As discussed in Chapter 3 (on ahimsa), different religions and spiritual traditions have their own

equivalents to the spiritual maturity of brahmacharya: conduct adapted to the search for Truth.

But the point remains that any Satyagraha leader must already have attained such maturity before

stepping into a leadership position. This point even holds true for situations where there are no

leaders: let participants collectively study, prepare, and mature together before any of them

embrace a leadership position. I will also point out, since the previous quotes used the word

“man,” that Gandhi’s use of the word man implies all of humanity. To be explicit, Gandhi felt

that leadership roles were to be filled by humans of all genders, ethnic and racial groups, and

ages. If a baby girl came out of the womb embodying the necessary components of Satyagraha

leadership, she should be allowed the opportunity to serve as a leader despite her age and gender.

In fact, in light of the paternalistic influences upon India at Gandhi’s time (which continues

throughout much of the world today), he made the following relevant observations:

“To call woman the weaker sex is a libel; it is man’s injustice to

woman. If by strength is meant brute strength, then indeed is

woman less brute than man. If by strength, is meant moral power,

then woman is immeasurably man’s superior. ... Without her man

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 325, excerpt from Young India,

April 10, 1930.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 249, excerpt from Young India,

April 3, 1930.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 98, excerpt from Harijan, June 10,

1939.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 216, excerpt from Young India,

August 2, 1928.

164

could not be. If non-violence is the law of our being, the future is

with woman.”

“In this campaign of Swaraj by self-purification, it will be nothing

surprising if the women outdo the men.”

But these affirmations don’t eliminate the need for women (and all humans) to develop the

necessary components to take on Satyagraha leadership roles.

The embodiment of and alignment with Truth combined with purity enable one to hear

the Inner Voice, the voice of Truth. This is an undisputable necessity for any Satyagraha leader:

“The Satyagrahi general has to obey his inner voice, for over and

above the situation outside, he examines himself constantly and

listens to the dictates of the Inner Self.”

Gandhi goes on to explain why the Inner Voice holds such importance:

“The fact is that Satyagraha presupposes the living presence and

guidance of God {Truth}. The leader depends not on his own

strength but on that of God {Truth}. He acts as the Voice within

guides him. Very often, therefore, what are practical politics so

called are unrealities to him, though in the end his prove to be the

most practical politics.”

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 381, excerpt from Harijan, March

17, 1946.

165

As stated earlier, Satyagraha cannot be measured by its visible effect; and without absolute

knowledge, there may be things even a very seasoned Satyagraha leader will not perceive -- even

Gandhi. But cultivation of the self to perceive the Inner Voice resolves this dilemma. Then

when the Inner Voice says something, Satyagrahis hold themselves (thoughts, words, deeds, etc.)

in alignment with this. In such instances, faith may be the driving force more so than other

things, but again such faith is validated by past accomplishments of Truth-based works. At other

times, conviction may be the staying force. Satyagraha leaders must embody sufficient faith and

conviction to inspire, or at least retain, the cooperation of others with lesser faith and conviction.

It is in this way that a participant may follow an order given by a Satyagraha leader that the

participant doesn’t fully understand or even questions within. The path of Satyagraha naturally

cultivates these leadership qualities, therefore, it is sufficient for future leaders to seek Truth to

develop these.

I strongly advocate that those who have matured to hear the Inner Voice honor it. The

discussion of what happens when people ignore or partially heed the Inner Voice is full with so

many variables that it could take many books to address such. But one thing is very clear: there

is always beneficence attained by honoring what the Inner Voice (of Truth) says. And why risk

such beneficence by ignoring or partially fulfilling what it states?

Once we have cultivated the Inner Voice, we are not limited to merely awaiting its

proclamations: we can consult it in a variety of ways. But also understand the Inner Voice is

also free to decide what to respond to and how. This last point can lead into a whole range of

mystic spiritual matters that go beyond the scope of this book, but consultation of the Inner

Voice is helpful in one of the key responsibilities of a Satyagraha leader: selection of Satyagraha

workers for appropriate tasks. Gandhi made the following observation:

“For a Satyagraha brigade only those are eligible who believe in

ahimsa and satya. Therefore, an intimate knowledge of the

persons enlisted is necessary for the organizers.”

I discussed earlier the dangers of embarking in mass Satyagraha prematurely. Consideration of

the readiness to embark on this and other efforts rests with Satyagraha leaders. To avoid

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 362 - 363, excerpt from Harijan,

October 22, 1938.

166

preventable mistakes, Gandhi emphasized the necessity of leaders having “intimate knowledge”

of Satyagraha workers. Even among those who profess commitment to Satyagraha, there may be

those who are deceitful, weak, or hypocritical, even if they there are not aware of they embody

these traits. The requirements of ahimsa and satya (Truth) among Satyagrahis are evident

enough, but how much one truly holds to these may only be explicitly known in pressing

situations, when it may then be too late to correct a mistake of selecting someone not prepared

for certain Satyagraha work. This is an instance in which consultation of the Inner Voice could

be very helpful. Just as Satyagraha leaders should constantly examine themselves to see that

they are in alignment with the dictates of the Inner Voice (of Truth), Satyagraha leaders should

also study and assess Satyagraha workers. Sometimes the Inner Voice may explicitly reveal

something about a worker, other times a “whisper” of the Inner Voice may be made in a passing

manner -- one that requires careful attentiveness to not miss. But regardless of how such

messages come, the responsibility of Satyagraha leaders is to have intimate knowledge of the

Satyagraha workers in their fold, especially those directly under their leadership. There is no

justifiable excuse for placing persons in tasks prematurely. Even when Gandhi did so, he went

through extended periods of reflection, self-correction, and further self-purification to minimize,

if not completely eliminate, within himself all characteristics and tendencies that led to such

mistakes.

When a Satyagraha leader matures to such a state of development, such a leader earns the

trust and cooperation of one’s followers. This ability to be trusted with leadership

responsibilities is something Gandhi took note of:

“A soldier of an army does not know the whole of the military

science; so also does a Satyagrahi not know the whole science of

Satyagraha. It is enough if he trusts his commander and honestly

follows his instructions and is ready to suffer unto death without

bearing malice against the so-called enemy.”

With such trust, a Satyagraha group can function with a high level of efficiency and order. This

can be combined with other elements of the science of Satyagraha to produce great change

within one’s self, one’s group, and the community (or nation or world) at large.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 229, excerpt from Young India,

March 20, 1930.

167

“if non-violence has to prove its worth, it must prove its worth

today. It must cease to be the passive or even impotent

instrument that it has come to be looked upon in certain

quarters. And when it is exercised in the most effective way, it

must act in spite of the most fatal outward obstructions. In fact

non-violence by its very nature must neutralize all outward

obstruction.”

˜ ˜ ˜

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule), 1938 reprint from original publication in 1909, p.

61, Chapter XVIII: Education.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Non-Violent Resistance (Satyagraha), 1961, p. 36, excerpt from Young India,

November 3, 1927.

168

CHAPTER EIGHT

The Satyagraha Approach to Education

“I do not for one moment believe that my life would have been

wasted, had I not received higher or lower education. Nor do I

consider that I necessarily serve because I speak. But I do

desire to serve and in endeavouring to fulfil that desire, I make

use of the education I have received. ... Both you and I have

come under the bane of what is mainly false education. I claim

to have become free from its ill effect, and I am trying to give

you the benefit of my experience and in doing so, I am

demonstrating the rottenness of this education.”

“It will not be denied, that a child, before it begins to write its

alphabet and to gain worldly knowledge, should know what the

soul is, what truth is, what love is, what powers are latent in the

soul. It should be an essential of real education that a child

should learn, that in the struggle of life, it can easily conquer

hate by love, untruth by truth, violence by self-suffering.”

Colonized India had little say in the government-run school system imposed upon the

country by Britain. As a result, Gandhi spent the early years of his life within a formal British-

style education system, even completing law school in Britain. He was faced with the prospect

of the modern European educational approach not only as a student, but also as a parent in India

and South Africa (which also had a modern European style education system). From both

Mohandas K. Gandhi, An Autobiography: The Story of My Experiments with Truth, 1957, p. 200.

Mohandas K. Gandhi, Hind Swaraj (Indian Home Rule), 1938 reprint from original publication in 1909, p.

60, Chapter XVIII: Education.

169

perspectives, as a former student and a parent of school-aged children, he realized the

shortcomings this educational approach has when it comes to Satyagraha and the quest for Truth.

Gandhi made the following remarks regarding his choice to not send his children to

formal European style schools:

“the artificial education that they could have had in England or

South Africa, torn from me, would never have taught them the

simplicity and the spirit of service that they show in their lives

today, while their artificial ways of living might have been a

serious handicap in my public work.”

He referred to the artificiality of such education, in part, because it does not promote nor is

aligned with seeking Truth. Most prevailing European (and American) approaches to education

focus on learning things to get a job, promote commerce, and continue cycles of violence (i.e.,

military war and economic exploitation). Ethics and morality are usually absent from such

approaches or only occupy a very marginal presence in curricula abundant with values counter to

these. Thus, modern approaches to education are much more likely to teach people how to make

money (even in immoral and unethical ways) than how to be honest (which goes beyond

refraining from lying).

Gandhi described the modern European approach to education as follows:

“It simply means a knowledge of letters. It is merely an

instrument, and an instrument may be well used or abused. The

same instrument that may be used to cure a patient may be used to

take his life, and so may a knowledge of letters. We daily observe

that many men abuse it and very few make good use of it; and if

this is a correct statement, we have proved that more harm has

been done by it than good.”

170

“Knowledge of letters” was a common phrase in Gandhi’s time that referred to reading, writing,

and arithmetic -- and for some, it also included science and history (which usually emphasized

war and rulership through domination). His observations about the harm done by this

educational approach is important: it has been at the hands of modernly educated persons that

much harm has been inflicted and spread throughout the world, particularly in the form of

economic exploitation, colonialism (and neo-colonialism), and war. Many of the most sloppily

fought and ill-thought wars, where countless civilians were killed (sometimes more civilians

than enemy combatants), have been conceived and overseen by some of the most (modernly)

educated persons. In fact, it’s extremely rare that an “uneducated” person without high

educational credentials makes any major decisions in such military efforts. This same dynamic

is prevalent in the economic system: most, if not all, of the major economic collapses were

caused and overseen by “highly educated” persons, many considered experts in their fields.

Depressions and recessions are not caused by “uneducated” people: the lack of a college degree

is often cause to not consider a person qualified for employment in the financial field, let alone

advance to a leadership or management position. This same dynamic plays out in a range of

fields: government, education, health (or sick) care, real estate, etc. It is also present in

contemporary community organizing, peace, and social justice fields. Many such organizations

require high level degrees in formal education, especially for leadership positions. And despite

my understandings, capabilities, and skills (many reflected throughout this book), many of these

organizations would not even consider me for employment since I don’t have a college degree.

Despite the harmful track record of the modern educational approach, many still herald it.

Gandhi challenged this kind of thinking in the following example about an uneducated peasant:

“A peasant earns his bread honestly. He has ordinary knowledge

of the world. He knows fairly well how he should behave towards

his parents, his wife, his children and his fellow villagers. He

understands and observes the rules of morality. But he cannot

write his own name. What do you propose to do by giving him a

knowledge of letters? Will you add an inch to his happiness? Do

you wish to make him discontented with his cottage or his lot?

And even if you want to do that, he will not need such an

education. Carried away by the flood of western thought we came