Real World Ahimsa
TweetAhimsa seems to be cliched word nowadays or seems practically obsolete. But the philosophy of Ahimsa I feel, is relevant.
Ahmisa is the opposite of Himsa which means “Violence” this needs to be interpreted as not just physical violence but mental violence. I consider violence is an act performed to inflict PAIN be it physical or mental. So Ahimsa is the art of not causing pain to others in any form.
In this blog my quick thoughts at Ahmisa in the house and at work.
Himsa at home
* As children we talk back / defy parents.
* As spouses we scold / put down / insult / scorn our partners.
* As parents we do the same to our kids.
Himsa at Work
* Admonish subordinates when they make a mistake.
* Put down support staff.
* Launch verbal/non-verbal attacks on peers when in competition.
Somethings which come to my mind
* Never insult or scold loved ones.
* React in a delayed manner. Hold back instant reactions.
* Consciously make sure you do not hurt anyone with words. Pain caused by words never heal.
* NEVER EVER INSULT people. You can never win by insulting, maybe you can put them down for sometime. It is difference between capturing and winning over.
* Even though people around you don’t meet your standards in ethics/ hard work/ cleanliness/ sincerity whatever THEY STILL HAVE TO RESPECTED AS HUMANS. Having a bad habit is a criteria to treat another person as a lesser mortal ( being a smoker I personally know how this hurts). I guess that is also DISCRIMINATION. Discrimination in any form is bad.
I can hear people saying – “Dude, this is easier said than done , Thanks for the advice.” 🙂
Let me share some tips that I try to practice to achieve the above someday it will become a natural part of me I hope :-). It’s all about mental conditioning and hard work.
* Never think low of another person just because the other does meet your expectations. He does deserve respect as a human being. For e.g. this could be your 3 year old kid who did not drink milk for the 100th time.
* There is no way you can expect to get respected by someone who you just insulted.
* More often than not the ones who are subdued momentarily look for a chance to rebel. A friend of mine after adjusting to his parents for 30 years refuse to come to India just his parents stay here.
If we make a conscious effort not to inflict pain even unintentionally to people around us , our lives will become better. I guess there is a “Selfish” motive of wanting to do this , that being, I having a peaceful and harmonious life with my surroundings.
Would love to hear from others if I am practical or too theoretical here.
P.S. This a repost from my personal blog.
May I recommend Non Violent Communication by Rosenberg? Read it and you will understand the reason why we communicate the way we do. I had a rather astonishing discovery that most of my communication was violent, if I can follow the paradigm of non violent communication the way Rosenberg defines it. If one truly wishes to walk on the path of Ahimsa, this book is a must read and the communication model a must to follow.
The purpose of words should be to create peace, silence and harmony. Yes, every time we choose to talk, we can have that thought in the back of the mind.
Regards,
Raj
Thanks Raj, I will surely the book you suggested.
Kumara!
Nice thoughts!. Guess a soft core is very important for all of us and the challenge is in recognizing the importance of the same than realizing it.
Just to feed some thoughts for your female readers:
The root “Him” is to be violent or to Injure. So Himsa and Ahimsa are from it. Btw, now just want to ignore the language barriers and think why “Him” in English refers to the male human species. :))
Thanks Raghu and also for giving the “men” a compliment. 😉
GReat post Kumaran. I think Ahimsa always gives us good result and it is good for our health also and makes us strong overtime . But very few misuse the Ahimsa and take it for granted. Everything has some negative hence we have to manage that also. But Himsa is like using a weapon to get things done, the work won’t be that quality becoz it is done based on fear. What will happen if we can’t use Himsa to get somthing done, for example, we can’t use himsa at unionized workplace like Ashok Leyland etc, how will you get something done at those places. Himsa overtime kills our own health also high BP, diabetics are the side effect of himsa. Which is one good? some taking advantage of us or spoiling our own health.
Kumaran,
Following ahimsa by everyone sounds good to ears. However, the reality of following ahimsa by every one is like the entire population in the world becoming vegetarians. This is my shallow thought, perhaps.
Mahendran
Noble thoughts..
I wish to make two points.
Usually no discussion about ahimsa goes without vegeterianism.Here I have a problem with its logic since killing plants is also himsa..Though living by ripe fruits and water is not himsa ,agriculture involves himsa.Is it even remotely practical to refrain from taking agricultural products?…Considering the fact that there are so many hungry people in the world and the use of technology in agriculture & green revolutions are put forward for alleviating poverty and removing famines ,how advisable it is to suggest a society even without agriculture…Now if one come backs to the argument that it will not amount to himsa when one is doing agriculture for self sustenance ,can one tell that plant life and small organisms have no soul(?) and killing it is different from killing chicken or fish(they have souls?) for self sustenance..
I respect people who follow vegeterianism as it involves considerable will power and self restraint (and may be health benefits) ,but is ahimsa possible in one`s choice of food?Then is it possible in all aspects of life.?…Or people following ahimsa are doing it at a level according to their own convenience and religious beliefs …
//A friend of mine after adjusting to his parents for 30 years refuse to come to India just his parents stay here. //
Its sad to hear that but isn`t it some problem of lack of understanding between the individuals and can ahimsa solve it?….Because Mahatma Gandhi, the greatest ahimsavaadi of modern times cannot stop the rebellion and self destruction of his own son…. …Has ahimsa anything to do with it?
Perhaps someone can throw light on this… 🙂
Very valid pointers Kumaran.
\\React in a delayed manner. Hold back instant reactions.\\\this is one of the best point caught by my eye,also one of the important pointer.Instant reactions always cause Outrageous effect at times…Delayed reactions saves a lot many a times…
Great and insighful points to be taken from this post..
Ahimsa approach is always laudable both personally and professionally.
Good post Kumaran.like Annapoorani i liked the delayed reaction bit.
Muthu,
Great point about Himsa being used is actually a self-inflicting weapon.
Mahendra,
Yes I agree it is tough, but someone somewhere we have to make a start. And I guess as the saying goes “Charity begins at home”. We can start with Ahimsa in our house, I guess that is fairy controllable environment to begin with.
Arun,
Nice points.
Regarding point 1: Yes that is much bigger discussion. I am trying to see the applicability of Ahimsa which is within the scope of each individual rather than “how to apply it to world”.
Point 2: The parents has used himsa to control the son when he was here that it backfired years later.If the parents had practised Ahmisa they would have a loving son who want to care for them.
Annapoorni,
Thanks for comments.
Sukumar,
Glad you like that point.
Hi Kumaran,
Thanks for your reply.
What I am confused with your blog post is the casualness in using the words like ahimsa and himsa. I do not know sanskrit. My understanding is that those words are related to shear physical violence/destruction. I think that these terms are more applicable to a nation or big populace forcing its opposite side to achieve its goal. For example, I do not think that diciplining your child by spanking can be termed as himsa. Workplace competitive behaviours may not also be termed as himsa unless a worker pulls a gun and indiscriminately fires on the employees. Another good example is firing an employee by the employer from a work cannot be termed as himsa. What do you think ?
What I mentioned in my previous blog was based on the fact that there is no one way of life where everybody acts more or less in the same manner. All people having more or less the same goal is more of a convenience than a reality. All can neither be passive nor active. All can keep on neither giving nor accepting. In engineering one might have studied about source and sink. The secret of life is something like that.
Hope that your head is not bleeding.
Mahe,
Dont’ worry my head is not bleeding. 🙂 🙂
I guess the question you are asking is the precise objective of this post. Himsa/Ahimsa is not just relevant in the big picture but also in the small picture.
“Spanking you kid” is himsa , bcoz you cause pain to your child. I am sure as parent you don’t want cause pain to your kid. But as parent I need to figure out someother means to communicate yto my kid that what it is doing is wrong and TAKE EVER MORE EFFORT to figure the method to do that coomunication without causing PAIN to the kid. Then as Muthu has said above we can get better results where there is no fear.
Not sure I understood you second part of the comment.
Hi Kumaran,
Regarding the issue related to kids, I agree with Muthu that fearless atmosphere may bring better results in terms of allowing the kids to be positive and explore great things, develop their own judgement etc. However, each kid is individual living being. As they grow up , they become independent. When they grow up, they need to feel that parents are actually fitting and filling in the useful part of their life. Otherwise the interaction between the kids and parents become week. That is my though. Hope this time I tried to shoot somewhere close to the target.
And you may ignore the second part of the confusing carzy comment. That is from MY OWN NEW theory, that I copied from else where.
Take care.
And an interesting article by N.S. Rajaram on “Who brought freedom-gandhi or nethaji”..
http://folks.co.in/2009/10/who-brought-freedom-gandhi-or-netaji/
This gives a different perspective, and new thinking on our history.. I could not verify the facts.. but as per the above article, when WW-II ended, nearly 3 million (30 lakh) indian soldiers returned home.. and the britishers were afraid just because of this.. (what if those soldiers turn against them, as the INA had infused a sense of patriotism amongst indian soldiers)..
And when britishers decided to leave india, there was a very long agreement over the transfer of power b/w gandhi and the britishers.. and one of the condition put forth in that agreement is that “India has to hand over Nethaji, either alive or dead to britishers”.. .. the father of mahatma, agreeing to betray a fellow freedom fighter, who took a different path for fighting britishers..
Apart from the above, the other related conditions put forth are 1. INA soldiers should NOT be merged to indian army.
2. Nethaji should not be promoted in india.
If we see post independant india, till 1970s, many of INA soldiers were not even given pension, which gandhians received. Nethaji was blacked out in all government functions, and indian history.
sorry.. the above comment was meant for the previous post..
Senthil,
Nethaji was definity given a raw deal by us .By doing so Gandhiji just proved he too was a human he had not acted in such a way he would have become God.Every human makes mistakes and that was deft a rare mistake from part of the Mahatma
Hi Kumaran,
Very good post. The “delayed reaction” point got to me! As you have said, its easier said than done and I think himsa to a mind and someone’s feelings is stronger, deeper and more hurtful than a physical harm. So it makes much more sense to be patient and careful about what we say and how we say it too..
Senthil,
Yes it is true , the INA was not treated with respect.
Sundara ,
thanks for the comment.s.
Senthil,
Interesting article on Team Folks site. Unfortunately, Rajaram’s thesis is more he-says/she-says. If we want to revise history, we need evidence. However, persuasive it maybe, history cannot be altered by utterings from Rajaram’s father’s orderly. There is something called evidence.
30 lakh soldiers? Are there any citations for this? Today’s (2009) India has a standing army of 1.4MM which is the 2nd largest army. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Army
Somehow, we had 3 million soldiers (in 1942) in the British Indian Army that too sent to fight WWII on behalf of Britain?
Gandhi’s nonviolence was a key strategy in winning back our independence. Obviously, there were several great leaders including Bose who deserve credit. That doesn’t mean Gandhi’s strategy is useless. To argue that case in a big article based on he-says/she says is ludicrous to say the least.
With all due respect, how the INA in a truck with the WWII’s evil forces – Japan, Germany, Italy.. and the massively losing side, can help India win independence from the winning side that Britain was on?
Gandhi is a world icon, whether you and Rajaram like it or not. Let us move on.
Ahimsa, like most other good personal qualities are the by-product of a life lived with spiritual purpose.
Materialistic purpose to life, exemplified by self-interest, self-gratification and self-aggrandizement, is what inevitably leads to himsa
When ahimsa or other such qualities like Austerity or Tolerance etc., are attempted to be ‘adopted’ and ‘implemented’ into the life of a materialistically oriented person, they become mere tools for further self-aggrandizement and for public consumption.
Forcibly adopting ahimsa would be a himsa on oneself.
Gandhi was unfortunately an example of the latter.
Spiritually advanced persons like Ramana Maharshi, of the former, where ahimsa and simple living was the result of a spiritually aware life.
That of the two, who is considered icon reflects the state of the world today.
Sukumar,
As per the following wikipedia article,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Army_during_World_War_II
“The Indian Army during World War II in 1939, numbered just under 200,000 men.[1] by the end of the war it would become the largest volunteer army in history, rising to over 2.5 million men in August 1945“
So the official tally comes around 2.5 million. Even if we discount .5 million for losses and other reasons, we have still 2 million indian soldier who participated in WW-II. That’s a big number, and cannot be ignored.
/** Gandhi’s nonviolence was a key strategy in winning back our independence. Obviously, there were several great leaders including Bose who deserve credit. That doesn’t mean Gandhi’s strategy is useless.
**/
While you have sought evidence for rajaram’s article, i would also like to seek evidence for your statement that gandhi’s non-violence won us freedom..
Even in our analysis of history, we find that gandhi’s quit india movement was brutally suppressed within few weeks of its starting. So there was no protest from 1943 to 1947 on the part of gandhi or INC.
/** how the INA in a truck with the WWII’s evil forces – Japan, Germany, Italy.. and the massively losing side, can help India win independence from the winning side that Britain was on?
**/
1. INA had around 40,000 soldiers, accompanying Japanese forces.
2. The massively losing side is not valid till 1944, when the battle fields are even on both sides.
3. No one claims that INA had won british army and won freedom. The fact is that INA had convinced 40,000 indian PoWs to fight against the british, which had a cascading effect on the prevailing indian army. Also, the brutal execution of the INA soldiers and officers stirred up tensions among british indian army.
The logic is that british lost the trust of the indian army due to INA.. bcoz, when these 40,000 ex-british soldiers could be turned against them, the same could be done to the remaining british indian army, who can raise against them anytime.
We can weave any number of sensational stories around gandhi.. but at the ground level, its the capability and capacity that matters.. Britain lost the capability to contain any possible revolts in indian army.. and they had lost the capacity to rebuild another new army.. and america was fuelling independance movements in many countries at that time.. Added with this, the loss of trust factor, increased the risk for them to further hold india.
Hence they have taken decision to quit rather than to face the uncertainity..
History is more about interpreting evidences rather than the evidences itself. Every history is a story in itself, and evidences only construct that story line.
In my opinion, the logic of nethaji as a factor for indian independance is more sensible than the propoganda of the gandhian story..
The important point here was that before WW-II, british indian army had only 2.5 lakh soldiers.. which was relatively easy to manage.. but at the end of the WW-II, the number of soldiers rose to 20 lakh well trained soldiers (to the minimal estimate), which means, 10 times the original army.
Hope, this sounds pretty logical and contribute a valid evidence 🙂
Karthik,Kumaran,Senthil,
It is not correct to put the burden of INA`s fate on Gandhi .. Congress leaders ,who were obviously in the Gandhian path, defended the INA prisoners at the historic red fort trials..Nehru,Asaf Ali etc appeared in the court to defend the INA prisoners…AICC passed a resolution (1945) supporting the cause of INA prisoners…
The fact that I.N.A adventorously took a different path from the mainstream national movement , played with fire by conveniently joining Fascist and Nazis ,and failed at the end in its strategy will not put any additional responsibilty on Gandhi or his ideals.
Arun,
How does your argument answer the fact that INA soldiers were discarded for more than 20 years after independance?
or the fact that gandhi betrayed nethaji by agreeing to hand over him to british.. pls see the old newsreport below.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/htarchive_51.htm#
It seems you are more concerned at covering up of gandhi, rather than finding the truth..
Also, pls refer to the following site..
http://missionnetaji.org/
a group of people are fighting to get the classified archival documents related to gandhi, using the RTI.. The archivals in india was destroyed by Nehru’s personal secretary Mohammad Yunus. (as admitted by Mrs. Indira gandhi to Khosla commission).
They are still fighting, but the government is not ready to disclose those details..
If, gandhi and his favorite Nehru are said to uphold Satyagraha, why they have to conceal and destroy the archivals? Is withholding truth, an example of satyagraha..
The archivals in india are destroyed.. But luckily the archivals of russian government regarding nethaji are still available. If they are known to the public, many unknown secrets about gandhi’s and nehru’s betrayal will come to light..
Atleast, the learned and educated people of india should question why government is withholding these information. Is anybody ready to place that demand?
Yet another very interesting link “DID Nehru betray Nethaji?”
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Soc/soc.culture.indian/2005-11/msg00004.html
Highlight of the above link:
———————————-
“To Mr.Clement Attlee,
Prime Minister of Britain,
10 Downing Street, London.
Dear Mr. Attlee:
I understand from a reliable source that Subhas Chandra Bose, your war
criminal, has been allowed to enter Russian territory by Stalin. This
is a clear treachery ad betrayal of faith by the Russians. As Russia
has been an ally of the British-Americans, it should not have been
done. Please take note of it and do what you consider proper and fit.
Yours sincerely,
Jawaharlal Nehru.”
my last comment is held under moderation
Senthil,
First of all, Gandhi’s role in India’s Freedom Movement is a part of our history. You can read the zillion references to it yourself. Rajaram is the person who is required to provide evidence because he is trying to revise history. What his father’s orderly said to him in person is not evidence, unfortunately for you and Rajaram.
Now coming to the 2.5 MM in WWII. Thanks for the link. I didn’t know so many from India were involved. 2 points here. The fact that 2.5MM will return and be hostile to Britain is pure speculation. Look at the citations in the Wikipedia article (the 2nd citation). That link has a statement that the WW-I team from India rose to 1.4MM from 230,000. So the rise from 200,000 to 2.4MM is not without precedent. How come the returning forces from WWI didn’t get the British scared?
Japan being in the losing side is not the only problem. It is who they were fighting with Hitler’s Germany and Mussolini’s Italy. Clearly the axis of evil of that time. Going into a truck with them is wrong at so many levels. It is not worth discussing this because Netaji i am sure did this with good intent and there is no reason to talk ill of a national hero who i respect very much as well.
Senthil,
On the link you posted from the derkeiler site. What can i say. You need to develop some scepticism on the things you read on the internet.
Here is the Hindustan Times report on the khosla commission interrogation [BTW i picked this from the same HT archive link you posted above].
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/Netaji/jan_1_71.htm
Once you read this you can make up your mind about the veracity of witness’ statements.
As i said many times, we need concrete evidence from neutral sites, not right wing ideologues who obviously support your views.
Senthil,
BTW, it is interesting to see, how passionate you are about denigrating Gandhiji, a national hero and a world icon. But the moment i say anything about our magnificent (sarcasm intended) caste system, you get all upset, saying i should not be judging caste system because caste system is the greatest thing since sliced bread. You even called Gandhi a fascist, but i cannot call our magnificent caste system evil.
Wonder why one rule for you and another for me.
Here is my challenge to you – i challenge you to write a post, accurately proving that Gandhiji’s role in india’s independence is next to nothing, with well researched citations from neutral sources. If you do, i will be the first person to change my opinion.
Senthil,
i just realized we had the same argument on Gandhi vs. INA impact a while back. I dug it up for your kind reference.
http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/04/20/the-real-history-of-india-part-10-the-abominable-caste-system-indian-fact-or-british-fiction/#comment-3142
It slipped my mind that India’s participation in WWII was bought by the British in 1942 in exchange for eventual freedom after the war. So this whole 2.5MM people returning and getting the British scared and made them run away is what can i say – fertile imagination, which the right wing definitely has plenty of.
This is why one should not depend so much on XYZ’s father’s orderly’s personal conversation.
Please don’t keep repeating the same arguments again and again.
Please respond to my challenge with a well-researched post. I double dare you.
Senthil,
BTW, the challenge i have given you also seems to be a repeat of the same challenge i gave you.
http://www.sastwingees.org/2008/04/20/the-real-history-of-india-part-10-the-abominable-caste-system-indian-fact-or-british-fiction/#comment-3081
Please don’t keep bringing up the same arguments over and over with no proper evidence. I challenge you again – i triple dare you to write a post with evidence.
Senthil,
Central govt level scheme to provide freedom fighter`s with pension was introduced in 1972.The only pension scheme ,for freedom fighters,before this was for ex- Andaman prisoners which was also introduced only in 1969….Don`t think that those who participated in Dandi march or other Gandhian movements were alone identified and given pension before this date.
Gandhi`s betrayal of Nethaji and the links do not deserve reply.It is unfortunate that you accuse me of covering up truth while you are invariably trying to throw mud at Gandhi citing less credible sources.
Tolerance of the intolerable is adharma.
When a person subjects himself to be beaten up by another, in the belief that such act will cause the other to feel guilty and withdraw, this person does three wrong things.
One, he tolerates the intolerable. He tolerates adharma.
Second, he does himsa to himself, though he may mistakenly believe that he is upholding the spirit of ahimsa.
Ahimsa is to not initiate violent acts with selfish intent.
A person who allows violent act to be done to himself, is also a participant in himsa.
Third, he is doing so in anticipation of eventual fruit, which is to cause guilt on the other. This is against the spirit of nishkama karma, action without seeking fruits thereof.
All three points are against the message of the gita, mahabharata, ramayana and the ‘traditional indian culture’ which exhorts people to uphold dharma, to live peaceful life in consonance with Nature, not indulging in violent acts with selfish purpose, and to actualise karma without seeking fruits thereof.
Gandhi’s exhortion to accept indignities without demur is on the lines of “show the other cheek” phrase attributed to christ. That he was comprehensively influenced by church and bible is evident upon reading his collected works(CWMG).
His public claims of following the gita and Sri Rama are incongruent with his actual actions and exhortions.
Gandhi on retrospection turns out to be a product of those times, a result of missionary influenced education system that de-valued indian culture and values, which caused many such ‘educated’ people to be influenced by christian ideas and western propaganda. Such people, deracinated, were unable to appreciate indian culture, unable to understand spirituality, which was the main theme of indian culture.
Gandhi’s ‘brahmacharya‘, ‘austerity’ and his version of ‘ahimsa” were the result of misguided attempts at borrowing from indian culture, something which westerners were actively doing at that time, and even now. Like all such attempts, gandhi’s too failed to reflect the real worth of indian values and culture because they were taken out of their most important context of spirituality.
That is why Max Mueller’s attempts to understand Vedas were failure. Just like a carnivores animal cannot digest grass, similarly, a person with inherent materialistic motives, which is what western approaches are all about, cannot understand indian culture. Whatever they feed off it, remains undigested and is discarded, often with condemnation.
West educated Gandhi and Nehru, among many others of their times were unable to understand their own culture, as are many others even now, because they abandoned its central theme of spirituality, which is not just to read the gita and other texts or imitating spiritual greats, but orienting one’s life purpose towards realisation of higher truths about oneself and creation. It was this that was central to indian culture. When taken out of this context, themes such as ‘brahmacharya‘, ‘ahimsa, austerity etc., become dogmatic pursuits towards self-aggrandizement and public show.
Some people, under the influence of christian propaganda about christ ‘dying for sins of mankind’, attempt to achieve a halo around them by projecting an image of ‘suffering’ and austerity. They mistakenly believe that by following christ’s action, as propagated by the church, of forgiving all sins of others while suffering himself, they will also be exalted.
Some others, equally so influenced, yet unable to gather enough gumption to hurt themselves in search of such ‘glory’, consider the people who appear to be doing so with awe, almost christ like, for their acts of ‘suffering’ and ‘forgiveness’.
Since british education was imposed upon india for two hundred years, it was natural that many people in early 20th century considered the ‘acts’ of Gandhi with awe and respect. Britishers, who naturally preferred peaceful agitators to violent ones, gladly propagated such ‘gandhian values’.
Nehru, a similar product of his times, took after the british, who tutored him, and appropriated the symbol of gandhi, and like the british, used it for political benefit. His succesors have merely followed his lead.
The result is for all to see.
When China does border intrusion, India finds virtue in ahimsa.
When Pakistan sends armed merceneries to kill indian civilians, India seeks virtue in ‘restraint’ and ‘talks’.
When Nepal, Bangladesh act against Indian national interest, India is silent spectator.
When America funds Pakistan who funds jihadis, India does not demur.
When Saudis fund madrassas, India is not concerned.
When Indian culture is being eroded by capitalist consumerism and communist activism, India calls it progress.
When missionaries, the maoists in their payroll and jihadis kill indians unprovoked, India is unmoved. It being ‘gandhian value’ for indians to suffer.
When indians express outrage at such acts and retaliate, it is vehemently condemned. That being not ‘gandhian value’.
In India ‘gandhian values’ are for indians, not for followers of western constructs such as christianity, islam, consumerism, communism, secularism, even maoism.
Gandhi is rightfully called ‘father of the nation’. That is actually an indictment considering the state of the nation and that of its citizens, who cannot understand dharma let alone the need to uphold it.
This being the same land that nurtured the civilisation that produced the concept of dharma.
This is the tragedy of gandhi. And India.
Incognito,
I fail to understand what you are saying. What would you advise India to do – wage a war with all its hostile neighbors who are now nuclear armed? – now there is a bright idea. Do you think India does not wage wars because India is following Gandhian principles of Ahimsa? If that is the case, how did it fight so many wars with Pakistan?
Gandhian principles are hard to practice and what Gandhi has done is a model for so many people of the world. But for some of us Indians, he is useless. I guess you belong to that category of people.
I issue the same challenge i gave to Senthil to you also. Write a well-researched post on your blog showing why Gandhi’s contribution is useless quoting from neutral sources. I dare you.
>>>”What would you advise India to do – wage a war with all its hostile neighbors who are now nuclear armed?”
Arjuna asked a similar question to Sri Krishna.
Experience the answer in bhagavad gita.
>>>”Do you think India does not wage wars because India is following Gandhian principles of Ahimsa?”
The gandhian ‘principles’, so-called, are something that cannot be ‘followed’, because they really are not principled. They were the products of attempt to create something based on perceptions imbibed through colonial masters of that time rather than sound fundamentals.
The lack of clarity of thought that produced such ‘principles’ is reflected in the way india has handled itself and others since ‘independence’.
>>>” Gandhian principles are hard to practice and what Gandhi has done is a model for so many people of the world. But for some of us Indians, he is useless. I guess you belong to that category of people.”
You are trying to justify your ‘beliefs’.
>>>“I issue the same challenge i gave to Senthil to you also. Write a well-researched post on your blog showing why Gandhi’s contribution is useless quoting from neutral sources. I dare you.”
Form your own convictions
Very interesting and heated debate. Sukumar, you are really trying hard but it is in vain. I had exact same thoughts and I felt it is not useful to reply to Senthil. I respect his beliefs and his strong conviction and I leave it like that. Again nothing personal. Senthil is indoctrinated with steady fast supply of extreme right wing propaganda. Let him be.
I think we got independence due to variety of reasons – Clement Atlee, WWII, Gandhi’s mobilization, Muslim League’s resistance, nation size issues, other various geopolitical issues. INA – it gives super kick when we think that we could have got independence like Americans got theirs with an army or that British were scared of the army of xyz million returning soldiers.
I personally met many cab drivers in NYC, who are usually from some East European, Middle east and some conflict zone origins. For example – a person from Pakistan Administered Kashmir. He was talking about his president being corrupt. It took a while for me to realize that he is talking about Pakistani President. When grilled further, they have ‘no’ illusions that the Kashmir will be united and under India.
What is so impractical about Ahimsa – minimally. What do we lose? As they say, 4th world war will be fought with stones and sticks. Do we feel glad to wipe off civilization and cause so much human sufferings for few political gains? For that simple reason, we need Ahimsa. I dont want 3rd world war to happen, but if it happens, while it happens, I am very confident that 80% of the world population will think of Gandhi.
Thanks Vamsi. Yes, while Ahimsa is hard to practice, it cannot be termed impractical, when we have atleast 2 instances of success with it in the world – Gandhi and MLK Jr.
I responded to Senthil because he seems to be repeating himself all over again.
As for Incognito, it is easy to say anything and get away with it using a pseudonym. Holding oneself accountable to one’s opinion requires courage. People using pseudonyms on the Internet don’t have that courage.
Sukumar,
/** Rajaram is the person who is required to provide evidence because he is trying to revise history. What his father’s orderly said to him in person is not evidence, unfortunately for you and Rajaram.
**/
Rajaram’s father served in INA. His statement can be considered as an evidence to be further explored (if not accepted totally).. what else could be the evidence, than the memories of those former INA soldiers?
If you are rejecting rajaram’s evidence, then it means, you are considering rajaram’s statement as total lie.. If that is the case, then this needs to be further debated..
I would like to point out, that even in courts, the witness’s statement is considered as evidence, after trial..
/** The fact that 2.5MM will return and be hostile to Britain is pure speculation **/
No one claims, that 2.5 MM soldiers will be hostile.. but, the trust factor is lost, and that was one of the reason.. please note the 1946 Royal Naval Mutiny, which further eroded the remaining trust of britishers over indian army..
/** So the rise from 200,000 to 2.4MM is not without precedent. How come the returning forces from WWI didn’t get the British scared?
**/
Because in WW-I, there was no INA, and NO Bose 🙂 ..
/** You even called Gandhi a fascist, but i cannot call our magnificent caste system evil. **/
Sukumar.. i explained this in our earlier post itself.. let me make my stand clear once again..
I am not against you criticising caste system.. i am against only branding and labelling..
We brand a thing as evil, only if we hate that to the core.. when we hate a thing, there cannot be fair analysis..
I called gandhi a fascist, because of his behaviour at that time.. fascist is a term used normally for a person who is NOT democratic.. we can further debate on whether he is fascist or not, as its a descriptive word..
But imagine, if i call gandhi an evil person.. can there be any further debate after this?
Generally, we tend to use words like “Good” and “bad” where we do a fair analysis.. But we tend to use the word EVIL, where we want to hate, and destroy something.. when we hate a thing, we dont want to see the good side of it.. we can note this behaviour even now, on many cases..
In my case, i hate gandhi, but i will not call him evil person, because i accept that he had good qualities too, which needs to be recognised..
Hope, i am making my point here..
/** It slipped my mind that India’s participation in WWII was bought by the British in 1942 in exchange for eventual freedom after the war. So this whole 2.5MM people returning and getting the British scared and made them run away is what can i say – fertile imagination, which the right wing definitely has plenty of.
**/
Sukumar,
Lets see which is a fertile imagination..
In 1939, congress passed a resolution, to offer support to war in return for indian independance. But britishers outrightly rejected it.
In March 1942, britain sent Cripp’s mission, which offered only limited Dominion status in return for co-operation of congress. But that was rejected by gandhi and the talks failed.
In July 1942, Congress passed a resolution demanding complete independance, and if not accepted, they would launch a civil disobedience movement.
The british did not accept the demand, and the congress started what is called the “Quit India Movement” under the so called leadership of gandhi.
The next day, gandhi was imprisoned, along with most of the prominent congress leaders, thus fizzling out the movement.
Gandhi was released only on 1944, due to his failing health..
After his release, gandhi is busy negotiating for release of remaining congress leaders. 🙂
ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quit_India_Movement
———————————————————————-
Now, from the above series of incidents, we find that britain did not offer any freedom, and the limited dominion status offered was outrightly rejected by gandhi..
Secondly, even if we accept your point, the question arises, why should gandhi start Quit India movement, if british had offered them the freedom?
Now, which is fertile imagination? 🙂
Finally, now the onus lies on the gandhian supporters to give credible proof for their version of history 🙂
Sukumar,
In response to your comment
http://www.sastwingees.org/2009/10/07/real-world-ahimsa/comment-page-1/#comment-12895
I agree that i did not answer that comment earlier.. i could not, because of the multiple fronts, in which i fought the argumental war single handedly 🙂 .. later as subsequent posts came up, i could not reply..
But, you are often accusing me, that i am repeating.. but is it not that you are also repeating the same saga of eulogizing gandhi or bashing caste system? 🙂
For any question, the answer should be the same 🙂 .. (IF the answer changes over time, then its not the answer 🙂 🙂 )
Vamsi,
/** Very interesting and heated debate. Sukumar, you are really trying hard but it is in vain. I had exact same thoughts and I felt it is not useful to reply to Senthil.
**/
Often we commit the mistake in any debate, that instead of focussing on opponent’s argument, we try to convince them of our views.. I too made this mistake in the past, but later realised..
You feel debating with me as useless, because, your focus is on convincing me, rather than debating.. Let’s try to focus on our argumental points.. if you still feel replying to me as pretty useless and waste of time, i will stop bothering everyone..
/** I respect his beliefs and his strong conviction and I leave it like that. **/
Is history a belief? I dont have any beliefs.. I have only understanding of history .. I hope, to further enhance my understanding (even if it changes), through such debates..
Understanding leads to realisation.. whereas beliefs lead to only stagnation of thoughts..
I would like to quote arun’s previous comment on freedom fighter’s pension, as a perfect reply to me (to be honest, i could not answer as of now 🙂 ) .. I wish for such kind of debates, rather than attempting at personal attack as something right winger or indoctrinated etc..
/** Again nothing personal. Senthil is indoctrinated with steady fast supply of extreme right wing propaganda. Let him be. **/
Vamsi.. do you feel, i had lost the ability to think myself 🙂 .. In the same vein, i revert back, that you are indoctrinated (and even seduced) with heavy dose of gandhian propoganda .. such kind of branding will lead to no where..
I am challenging your views on gandhi, and you are challenging mine.. that’s it.. Even if i am a rightwinger, its not an issue..
Vamsi.. i have a new word called “Gandhian Neurosis” .. hope, you understand the meaning of neurosis..
For those who dont know, pls refer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurosis
gandhian ahimsa, gandhian satyagraha, are examples of such gandhian neurosis 🙂 .. the symptoms of such disease is violence phobia, war phobia, etc..
(PS: this comment is intended for sarcasm )