Acharya Tulsi
Question—In the context of non-violent resistance, movement where something is not accepted, Satyagrah, create pressure by lying on the higher, strike, encircling or trapping the higher officials to create pressure and such other means are effective to what extent.
Answer—If we talk about non-violence then we have to find such resisting weapons as well. Gandhiji had applied Savinay Avagya Andolan (movement where something is not accepted), and lying on the ground to create pressure and such other means. Even today we get to see such means being used here and there. It seems now that the influence these means created at the time of Gandhiji had faded now. Why did it happen? As a reply to this question it would be sufficient to say that the purity of such traits has got obscured.
The people who use such means praise Gandhi and his ideals and the means by which these ideals can be attained to even today. Even then the ordinary mass fails to see the purity of these means. In this regard I feel that in non-violent resistance the way, time, place and situation must be considered in a similar way. It is equally important to be alert, to be free of the feeling of any self-interest. An amiable perspective and to have an intense feeling of self-sacrifice. In the absence of all this purity of such means comes to an end and they are misguided.
I believe that in non-violent resistance one may co-operate. By not cooperating also someone may be compelled but the application of muscle power is not accepted there. Application of power is violence in itself. To make one accept one’s view accumulation of one’s co-operation is a different aspect. If we take blockade for an instance then no violent elements are used, that is true, but still I cannot incorporate it in the means of non-violence because the feeling of self-sacrificing oneself someone may be compelled. To compel someone by means of power (mass power) is not non-violence. Application of power is violence then it doesn’t matter whatever form it takes.
This way savinay Avagya Andolan (a movement where nothing is accepted), satyagrah, encircling someone and such other means can be easily incorporated in non-violence without any hesitation, if the purity, an alert perspective, time, place, the proper judgement of situation and the feeling of self-sacrifice are present in the role they play. Such elements only make such means successful.
Ignoring all these elements also create doubt in success. When Gandhiji set off for ‘Dandi Yatra’ to break the law concerning salt then he did not allow the sisters of our nation to participate in it Kasturba, Mithu Bahan (Sister) and others felt offended by this decision. They also complained Gandhiji, ‘You talk of giving equal importance to women as that of man then why are you not including us in this Satyagrah and the feeling of self-sacrifice?’ If not then, then have to include us in this movement.
Gandhiji said, ‘I have no doubt concerning your strength and the feeling of self-sacrifice but even than I am not taking you all in this movement, it has some other reason. You all know that British is a civilized race. Lest they use physical force over women and seeing them they leave us as well or feel compassionate. I do not want that due to this reason lathi charge is not resorted to or there is no firing just because women are with us. The second point is that inclusion of women in this movement will create opportunities for the critics to say that they have been used for our safety. T want that no handle before the self-sacrifice of our party members and no way must our movement become weak, therefore, I cannot permit women to be a part of this Satyagrah.
This example makes it clear that for what role non-violence approves of what aspects? In the absence of that role the same means might be disapproved. Today I see the absence of that pure role then how can any means become righteous? The question is not of means but the creation of role.
Question—Can non-violence solve the problem of war?
Answer—The solution of war is undoubtedly non-violence. The never ending arms use in violence is tradition. The tradition of arms can never put an end to war.
The end of war in reality can be made possible by non-violence only. In the absence of power control the war that stops can never be put to an end. This gap is due to preparation of next war, to accumulate power. Therefore, the literal meaning of peace today—the time span between two wars where preparation is taken for the next war.
The solution of war is non-violence only; this is a principle of non-violence. Now if we ponder over the practical aspect of it, then war in itself is a compulsion or limitation of time, place and situation. It only gives rise to war but the question arises whether war is a solution to all these problems. A solution may come from mutual co-operation and the feeling of friendship. This makes it clear that war can suppress those situations but can never make them calm. Whenever any suppressed trait crypts it causes havoc with double force. The Second World War and the sparks of third world war are the burning proofs of it. In a situation like this the assurance can only be found in non- violence.
Non-violence has the power to put an end to hostile situations, but it can become effective only before war or after war. What can non-violence do at the time of war? The answer to this question is not difficult but the application of it is certainly difficult because to apply it an appropriate role a strong leadership, a steadfast faith, an non-violence and men willing to sacrifice their lives are the few virtues that are needed. As long as they are absent non-violence can never become fully active. Passive non-violence is even worse than violence.
War is a dangerous fever. To calm it down it is very important to bring out the inner heat. From this point of view sometimes war is considered very important. There is no dual view that the heat must be reduced but for that reduction war is only the way needs contemplation.
The doctors and medical experts are in view that to stop or reduce fever abruptly and by artificial means is to give rise to other reactions and to invite other diseases along with it. It is better to let that heat come out on its own accord and that is the way to free oneself from many diseases. Fasting, balancing cold and heat and by such means even fever that is dreadful proves itself to be a blessing.
If war is imposed upon any nation by some other nation, it is attacked in a situation like. This principle of non-violence can never be fully refuted because the influence of non-violence over the laws of war is quite effective.
There are certain laws of war that have been formed keeping the humanistic point of view in mind. They are as follows:
- Any attack over hospitals, religious shrines, schools and colleges is forbidden.
- Bombarding over populated places is forbidden.
- Attacking non-military zones are not allowed.
This thought can also be developed further. In Rishabh age a battle between Bharat and Bahubali became imminent, then it was thought why the entire innocent crowed would be thrown in the flames of war? When the conflict was between two persons then why the rest of the subjects would be tortured? A wrestling was organized by which the strength would be tested and the mass killing that could have been more than lakhs, could also be avoided. At last it was executed and a colossal man killing was avoided.
The aforesaid application was also a step forward towards non- violence. In that situation it was a significant application. Today’s situation is different but even then based on this example any practical solution can be found, it is my belief. The principles must get a practical ground seeing the situation and consequences of war non- violence only seems to be the belief and assurance. All that is needed is a strong leadership, the absence of which must end now, it is of almost importance.
