Gandhi: The Great Little man who is Still Relevant

      

            

                "Generations to come will scarce believe that 

such a one as this ever in flesh and blood 

walked upon this earth."

-Albert Einstein

After more than a century, when the great soul opened his eyes on this earth, humanity has seen numerous incidences. During his lifetime, he witnessed many gory acts and wars viz world wars and communal conflagrations that led to the loss of many innocent lives. A simple, frail, down-to-earth but strong and upright personality, he was Mohan Das Karamchand Gandhi, sobriquet ‘Mahatma’.

Great thinkers like Leo Tolstoy was his lighthouse whose work 'War and Peace' affected Gandhi a lot. Known for his philosophy of truth, nonviolence and 'Satyagraha', Gandhi faithfully adhered to them and sometimes went beyond for the sake of his ideals. He called off the nationwide agitation on a single incidence of Chauri Chaura mishappening. He did not endorse the violent means adopted by immortal revolutionary Bhagat Singh and not pleaded mercy for him when he met Lord Irwin as well. "Gandhi was inevitable. If humanity is to progress, Gandhi is inescapable. He lived, thought and acted, inspired by the vision of humanity evolving toward a world of peace and harmony. We may ignore Gandhi at our own risk." Martin Luthar King Jr had said after his assassination. After so many years of his sacrifice, however, have we yet learned a lesson?

The second day of October, the day he was born, is perennially observed as 'Gandhi Jayanti'. It is more of a ritual than an occasion for introspection; has become a vogue to remember Gandhi ceremoniously rather than to follow his ideas. After 151 years, it is an apt time to ask questions with ourself. We have made Gandhi sacrosanct and a taboo. The thoughts and philosophy Gandhi lived and died for are ostensibly becoming dull. It has become rhetoric rather than a practice. Are we following his ideas? What is ailing our society?

The incidences during and after the vivisection of the country on the false 'Two Nation Theory', the whole landmass, India that was, thrown into the blast furnace of communal frenzy. Helpless Gandhi could do nothing. He had become all alone. While the two newly independent nations were being euphoric, he was observing fast onto death to stop the deranged carnage. Gandhi was the spectator of ruthless killing of his principles. The bleeding and lacerated humanity were suffering. People forcefully uprooted from their soil, their belongings snatched and modesty of their womenfolks corrupted. 

Vanquished and desperate, they were frantically searching for protection from natural hardships and the artificial catastrophe. They needed compassion and consolation. They were provided help but did they get what they needed the most? 

Land of Gandhi, Buddha, Ram and Krishna is still reeling under the vicious thought process of vivisection. Gandhi, who advocated for self-help by promoting village upliftment, 'Sarvodaya' and 'Gramodaya', were stashed by the governments for a fairly long time since independence. The political system and the governments though were apparently in favour of Gandhian way of economy, had a clear intention of not to follow it in practice. His thought process was not given due weightage and heavy industries, big dams large metallurgical factories were established. The heavy industries were the need of time but for a nation which was utterly sucked and weak, such steps could have waited for a while. Rural India became weaker, the youths migrated to cities for jobs and a yawning gap between haves and have-nots developed. 

Violence, arson and exploitation are still prevailing. Sometimes patronized by the system, the criminal offence and violence are becoming rampant. What is the remedy? Is adhering to Gandhian philosophy the only way to come out of these convolutions? It is here we need to cogitate a bit dispassionately. Gandhian thought process does not permit flexibility but we have also seen a deviation in his approach. Gandhi, who wrote an open letter to the British people appealing them not to fight Hitler but oppose him by a spiritual force and he who had called off the agitation after Chauri Chaura instance, gave a call of ‘Do or Die’ in 1942. His ‘Ahimsa’ became subjective. If a mosquito is sucking, it is imperative to kill it.

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in his book ‘India Wins Freedom’ wrote that for him non-violence was a matter of policy, not of creed. Maulana further says, “Our decision to fight non-violently was therefore compelled by circumstances. It was not a matter of creed for me and for many other Indians. If freedom could be obtained by fighting, we would certainly participate in the war.” War and violence are devastating, therefore, ought to be avoided but in difficult situations when the enemy is hell-bent, it is religious to give a befitting reply. 

In the days of cry and clamour, Gandhi and his thoughts appear relevant. His model of development was holistic for whom the soul of India resides in villages. Village upliftment should be and it is the prime importance for the overall development and happiness of the country.