The ethico-spiritual ahimsa and the political ahimsa, like two branches of the same tree, have to draw apart and pursue dis-tinct objectives. The former limits its concern to the individual's conduct in life and in society with an eye on the deliverance of his or her soul, whereas the latter is called upon to bear a responsibility for the destiny of the whole people and the nation, they constitute, in face of gravest challenges from inside and out-side. But, does ahimsa carry within itself the qualification and the competence to shoulder political responsibilities, especially in favour of a slave nation, crushed under the heels of an alien ruler? Mahatma Gandhi firmly held that ahimsa possesses the needed qualification and the competence. Gandhiji carried out his unique experiment with political ahimsa under this conviction. There have been very different opinions regarding the sweet or bitter fruits or positive or negative results of Gandhiji's experiment. Anyway the question arises: Would it be judicious and rewarding to draw political solutions either exclusively from non-violence or from violence? Perhaps the right course would be to depend on the vigilant practical wisdom or the awakened spiritual wisdom, which would, without any prejudice, employ non-violence or violence or a mix of both as needed to meet a political challenge. How the dogmatic exclusiveness has fared in the realm of politics can be best understood through a study of the political happenings in this country during the last two thousand years and in particular during this twentieth century.
In this context, two facts cannot be ignored. Political defeat or rout on the battlefield, particularly at the hands of an alien aggressor, has never stopped at the demolition of the political citadel. It has invariably gone to bring down or to systematically erode with speed the social, cultural and religious structures of the vanquished. Hence, a cardinal value spontaneously gets attached to the political and combative shield, so essential for the protection and growth of socio-cultural and religio-spiritual values of a people or a nation. Any play on any plane with this crude realism is fraught with grave risks and far-reaching consequences. The second fact is that non-violence and violence are not and cannot be values in their own selves. They are mere actions-reactions or responses exhibited under specific motivations or provocations. They need to be employed as instruments by the practical or spiritual wisdom, the realm of which should, in no case, be permitted to be overwhelmed by any one of the two. Actually, ahimsa and violence are the opposite faces of the same coin, the coin being the individual ego or the social ego. One cannot be separated from the other and each of the two, when pursued in isolation, is bound to produce distressing results. Both will have to walk hand-in-hand, if constructive and durable solutions are sought after.
I was nineteen when the trauma of partition overtook this land with widespread genocides. It was not just a usual division of property between the two brothers. It turned out to mean the wiping out of the hereditary culture and religions and their symbols from about one-third of the country by those who were not aliens and who actually belonged to the same ancestry, ethnicity, history and cultural traditions. The biggest question of Indian history: "Why and how this happened?" hit all Indians, specially those who gave value to the ever-flowing Ganges of the age-old culture and wisdom of this land. This question has haunted my mind ever since. Gradually, I came to realise that various social, political and military reasons of our routs at the hands of foreign invaders during the last two thousand years, as enumerated by historians, e.g.
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend
Visual Search
Manage Wishlist