Gandhi-logo

Gandhiji's spiritual ideas

- By J B Kripalani*

Gandhiji was not a philosopher or the kind of theoretician who develops his theories and evolves a system which would give a rational explanation of life and its different facets and, if possible, its ultimate goal. Gandhiji's ideas grew and deve¬loped as he faced practical situations and sought solutions to problems which confronted him. If one wants to understand Gandhiji's life and work, one must try to understand his spiritual ideas and ideals in the light of which he conducted his struggles against group injustice and tyranny and carried out his reform programmes.

The establishment of British rule in India led to a review of existing ideas, ideals and institutions. The first impact of this contact was naturally in the religious field. This was because most of the ideas, ideals and institutions in India were, more or less, connected with religion. The result of this was the rise of new reformist sects like the Brahmo Samaj and the Prarthana Samaj. Along with the growth of the sepa¬rate sects, there were also movements in the orthodox Hindu fold to interpret and restate the basic doctrines of Hindu-ism. These resulted in the establishment of the Arya Samaj and the interpretation of Hinduism by Shri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Vivekananda, Ramtirth and the Theosophical movement under Mrs. Besant. This spiritual ferment was confined to Hindu society as the Hindus more than any other major community in India had taken to the new system of education introduced by the British.

Gandhiji was brought up in a religious atmosphere. He belonged to a Hindu Vaishnava family, influenced to some extent by Jainism. His mother was a devout lady. His father often invited the learned of different faiths to discuss religious problems. In England his insistence on vegetarian diet brought him into contact with idealist Englishmen who had given up meat and become vegetarians. He also came under the influence of the liberal thought in England of the 19th century. He had made a study of the Bible, specially the New Testament. He had also made himself familiar with the writings of Tolstoy, Emerson and Thoreau. In South Africa he had to work among people of many nations, races and colours. He came in contact there with Christian missionaries. Some of them were anxious to save his soul by converting him to the 'True Faith*', Christianity. Others were concerned not so much with his soul as with the work that he was carrying on there for the uplift of his countrymen, who had become citizens of South Africa. All these contacts confirmed him in his own faith, Hinduism. But his Hinduism had little to do with the forms, ceremonials and institutions that it had created within itself. He rejected everything that was against reason and against humanity. Though he called himself an orthodox Hindu, he did not subscribe to the pernicious and cruel system of untouchability. He did not believe in the caste system as it prevails in India. About this he says:

God did not create men with the badge of superiority or inferiority; no scripture which labels a human being as inferior or untouchable because of his or her birth can command our allegiance; it is a denial of God and Truth which is God.

He did not observe Hindu ceremonials or holidays. He rarely visited temples except sometimes through courtesy. Even then he would not enter a temple which was not open to Harijans, as he called the so-called untouchables. He thought image worship and going to the temples were good for those who needed such props to their faith. His Hinduism was based on the teachings of the Upanishads and the Gita. Like other great reformers in Hinduism he wrote a commentary on the Gita. He moulded his life in accordance with the basic teachings of this scripture. He was a karmayogi, as described in the Gita. In accordance with its teachings he held that good works must be performed in the spirit of sacrifice to the God of Humanity, specially in serving Daridranarayana, God the poor and the down-trodden. He says:

I am endeavouring to see God through service of huma¬nity, for I know that God is neither in heaven, nor down below, but in every one.

He also says that whenever he was in difficulty he had recourse to the Gita and it was the solace of his life. He held that through work done as sacrifice, without attachment, and without hankering after desired results and with equanimity one could get the summum bonum of life, "salvation" or as he often said with the best thought of Hinduism, "self-realiza¬tion". About this he says:

Man's ultimate aim is the realization of God, and all his activities, political, social and religious, have to be guided by the ultimate aim of the vision of God. The immediate service of all human beings becomes a neces¬sary part of the endeavour simply because the only way to find God is to see Him in His creation and be one with it. This can only be done by service of all.

For Gandhiji religion and morality were the same. They were interchangeable terms. This was natural for a karmayogi, who has to act in every sphere of life.-Gandhiji did not believe that religious activity was separate from the other activities that kept society together. For him the fpsic principles of this morality were truth and non-violence. These two were elaborated into eleven principles and a verse containing them was recited morning and evening at his prayers. These are:

ahimsa satya asteya brahmacarya asamgraha sarirasrama asvada sarvatra bhaya-varjana sarvadharma-samanatva svadesi sparsabhavana.
(non-violence, truth, non-stealing, chastity, non-posses¬sion, physical labour, control of the palate, fearlessness, equality of all religions, swadeshi, discarding of un- touchability).

The first five of these are the basic moral principles of Hinduism and Jainism. The six others are their derivatives suited to the requirements of the times.

Believing in fundamental moral values common to all the great religions of the world, he said he had nothing new to give to the world. "Truth is as old as the hills." He often said that he had no desire to create a new sect. As a matter of fact, sects are generally created not by prophets and reformers but by their followers. Christ said, "I have not come to destroy the Law but to fulfil it." It can, therefore, be said that Christ was not the first Christian. However, a law can only be entirely fulfilled when it embraces the whole of humanity. Whatever Gandhiji might have said, all those of the present generation and the innumerable generations to come who follow Gandhiji's ideas and ideals in this spirit are truly his followers. In this, as Christ said, it may be that "the first shall be the last and the last first".

With the Gita he also believed that all religions are different paths leading to the same goal. He says:

Religions are different roads converging to the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads, so long as we reach the same goal? In reality, there are as many religions as there are individuals... So long as there are different religions, every one of them may need some distinctive symbol. But when the symbol is made into a fetish and an instrument of proving the superiority of one's religion over others', it is fit only to be discarded.

He was therefore tolerant towards all religions, nay, he accepted their fundamental teachings. These regulated men in performing their daily tasks, which must be guided by the basic principles of morality. The moral principles were the same in all the great religions of the world. Gandhiji says:

I believe in the fundamental truth of all great religions of the world. I believe that they are all God-given, and I believe that they were necessary for the people to whom these religions were revealed. And I believe that, if only we could all of us read the scriptures of the different faiths from the standpoint of the followers of these faiths, we should find that they were at the bottom all one and were all helpful to one another.

Though he believed that all religions were true, he did not consider them infallible. They were the creation of men and therefore had something of their imperfection. He says:

After long study and experience, I have come to the conclusion that (1) all religions are true; (2) all religions have some error in them.

He further says:

I do not believe in the exclusive divinity of the Yedas. I believe the Bible, the Koran and the Zend Avesta to be as much divinely inspired as the Vedas. My belief in the Hindu scriptures does not require me to accept every word and every verse as divinely inspired . . . I decline to be bound by any interpretation, however learned it may be, if it is repugnant to reason or moral sense.

Gandhiji as we have said made no difference between religion and morality, dharma not as popularly understood now but as it was understood and used by the ancient rishis, that it should inform and guide all our activities. "Dharma" means that which supports.

As Gandhiji believed in the basic teachings of all the great religions of the world, he with his co-religionists did not believe in proselytizing activity. In his Ashram there were Muslims, Christians and Buddhists, but he never tried to convert them to Hinduism or even to his own brand of Hinduism. One day Mira behn expressed a desire to become a Hindu. Gandhiji's reply was that she should live in her own faith. By becoming a Hindu she would not in any way raise her moral stature. It was not necessary for a person to change his religion but he should act according to the basic principles of his or her own religion. It was necessary for a Hindu to be a good Hindu, as it was necessary for a Muslim to be a good Muslim and a Christian to be a good Christian. Speaking to Christian priests in India he told them that the humanitarian work that they did was good; but it would diminish its value if it was done with the motive of converting the followers of other faiths to Christianity. He says:

I do not believe in people telling others of their faith, especially with a view to conversion. Faith does not admit of telling. It has to be lived and then it becomes self-propagating.

He did not think that religion was to be practised in a cave or on a mountain-top. It must manifest itself in all the actions of man in society. He says:

I do not believe in people telling others of their faith, especially with a view to conversion. Faith does not admit of telling. It has to be lived and then it becomes self-propagating.

He did not think that religion was to be practised in a cave or on a mountain-top. It must manifest itself in all the actions of man in society. He says:

I do not conceive religion as one of the many activities of mankind. The same activity may be governed by the spirit either of religion or of irreligion. There is no such thing for me therefore as leaving politics for religion. For me every, the tiniest, activity is governed by what I consider to be my religion.

He believed in God but for him God was the moral law, the dharma. He therefore considered that all those who believed in the moral law were spiritual even though they were so- called atheists. He says that "Truth is God".

To me God is Truth and Love; God is ethics and mora¬lity; God is fearlessness. God is the source of Light and Life and yet He is above and beyond all these.

Again he says:

There can be no manner of doubt that this universe of sentient beings is governed by a Law. If you can think of Law without its law-giver, I would say that the Law is the Law-giver, that is God. When we pray to the Law we simply yearn after knowing the Law and obeying it. We become what we yearn after.

He uttered Ramanama though he made it clear that the Rama of his conception was not the husband of Sita or the son of Dasaratha but he who abides in the hearts of men, the antaryami. However, like the prophets of old, he did not confuse the minds of the ordinary man and woman to whom Rama and Krishna are the Supreme Being even though they took upon themselves a human form and worked for the establishment of righteousness, dharma and the destruction of adharma. For himself he believed in a formless and attributeless God. He frankly admits that the existence of God cannot be proved by reason, yet it is not against reason. Though he could not prove His existence by rational arguments which may not convince, he felt it within himself. He says:

There is an indefinable mysterious Power that pervades everything. I feel it, though I do not see it. It is this unseen Power which makes itself felt and yet defies all proof, because it is so unlike all that I perceive through my senses. It transcends the senses. But it is possible to reason out the existence of God to a limited extent. I do dimly perceive that whilst everything around me is ever-changing, ever-dying, there is underlying all that change a Living Power that is changeless, that holds all together, that creates, dissolves, and re-creates. That informing Power or Spirit is God. And since nothing else I see merely through the senses can or will persist, He alone is.
And is this Power benevolent or malevolent? I see it as purely benevolent. For I can see that in the midst of death life persists, in the midst of untruth truth persists, in the midst of darkness light persists. Hence I gather that God is Life, Truth, Light. He is Love. He is the Supreme good.

Gandhiji also believed that great saints and sages of all ages and climes have believed in God and their unbiased evidence kept before us through their life and work must be conclusive.

Believing in God, Gandhiji had great faith in prayer. Morn¬ing and evening there were prayers in the Ashram. When he was on tour, the evening prayers were performed in public before ever-increasing congregations. In his prayer no image or symbol was kept He did not believe in image worship for him¬self but, as I have said, he had no objection to it for those who need such symbols. He says:

I do not disbelieve in idol worship. An idol does not excite any feeling of veneration in me. But I think that idol worship is part of human nature. We hanker after symbol¬ism .... I do not forbid the use of images in prayer. I only prefer the worship of the Formless. This preference is perhaps improper. One thing suits one man; another thing will suit another man, and no comparison can fairly be made between the two.

His prayers were not petitions. They were in praise of God and they were the yearnings of the soul. They also were meant to strengthen man and keep him away from earthly temptations. He says:

Prayer has saved my life. Without it, I should have been a lunatic long ago. I had my share of the bitterest public and private experiences. They threw me in temporary despair. If I was able to get rid of that despair, it was because of prayer. It has not been a part of my life as truth has been. It came out of sheer necessity, as I found myself in a plight where I could not possibly be happy without it. And as time went on, my faith in God increased, and more irresistible became the yearning for prayer. Life seemed to be dull and vacant without it. I had attended the Christian service in South Africa, but it had failed to grip me. I could not join them in it. They supplicated God, I could not; I failed egregiously. I started with disbelief in God and prayer, and until at a late stage in life I did not feel anything like a void in life. But at that stage, I felt that as food is indispensable for the body, so was prayer indis¬pensable for the soul. In fact food for the body is not so neccssary as prayer for the soul. For starvation is often necessary to keep the body in health, but there is no such thing as prayer starvation. You cannot possibly have a surfeit of prayer. Three of the greatest teachers of the world—Buddha, Jesus and Muhammad—have left un-impeachable testimony that they found illumination through prayer and could not possibly live without it. Millions of Hindus, Mussalmans and Christians find their only solace in life in prayer. Hither you call them liars or self-deluded people. I will say that this "lying" has a charm for me, a truth-seeker, if it is "lying" that has given me that mainstay or staff of life without which I could not live for a moment. In spite of despair staring me in the face on the political horizon, I have never lost my peace. In fact, I have found people who envy my peace. That peace comes from prayer. I am not a man of learning, but I humbly claim to be a man of prayer. I am indifferent as to the form. Everyone is a law unto himself in that respect. But there are some well marked roads, and it is safe to walk along the beaten tracks, trodden by the ancient teachers. I have given my personal testimony. Let everyone try and find that as a result of daily prayer he adds something new to his life.

Never in his prayer meeting was any patriotic song sung. Good and desirable as love of one's country may be, it was not the love of God. His prayer meetings were also occasions for him to take the public into confidence about what was happening in the councils of the great whether in the national organization or in the Government. He took them into confidence to the extent that was permissible and desirable. He did this because he wanted from the people enlightened cooperation in the national struggle which was not only meant to remove the foreign yoke but was also meant for their political, economic, social and, above all, their moral advancement. He often said that to the extent India was reformed, to that extent it would be free. A reformed India would be a free India.

Gandhiji believed in self-discipline. He felt that his own personal progress and all that he had been able to achieve was because he lived a life of discipline. He held with the Gita: "To him who is temperate in eating and recreation, in his effort for work, and in his sleep and wakefulness, Yoga becomes the destroyer of his misery."1

He believed in occasional fasting. He thought it helped in the concentration of mind. Apart from this he held that fasting had a purificatory effect. Sometimes he fasted for the moral lapses of those who lived or worked with him, because he con¬sidered himself responsible for their conduct. Any misbehaviour on their part was a proof of some imperfection in him. He thought and said that as he became purer his surroundings would adequately respond.

He believed in taking vows. He thought that if properly observed these strengthened the will. However the present writer feels that sometimes vows taken and broken repeatedly weaken the will and its power of resistance to evil.

We have said that Gandhiji's life was well-regulated. But he was not a flesh-mortifying ascetic. Believing in the philosophy of karmayoga, right action, he could not afford to impair his health by the mortification of the flesh as is sometimes done by ascetics. The restrictions in regard to diet, etc., -that he placed upon himself were due to circumstances. His vow not to take more than five Varieties of food a day was taken because wherever he went generous and hospitable hosts provided for him various rich and luxurious dishes. It was in order that his kind hosts might not put themselves to extra trouble on his account and to avoid waste in a poor country like India, and not for ascetic reasons that he put the above restriction on himself. He also felt that increasing one's wants beyond a particular limit, in¬stead of benefiting one, becomes a burden. But Gandhiji had a good appetite and whatever food he took was healthy and pure.

He took time in masticating his food and seemed to enjoy it. If a person fell ill in the Ashram, everything prescribed for him by the doctor was made available whatever the cost. He dis¬carded his shirt and cap and satisfied himself with a loin-cloth. This was due to the fact that India in those days did not produce enough cloth, especially hand-spun and hand-woven cloth, to satisfy the minimum needs of the people. Also this loin-cloth was meant to be his identification with the poor. Other restric¬tions of this nature were imposed because he wanted his entire life to be devoted to the service of humanity. It is a fact that not only public workers fighting for a cause, but all original thinkers and serious workers in any field of life's activity must and do limit their physical wants. Only in a Philistine age which needs constant excitement and believes in the multiplication of physical wants as a mark of progress and culture will Gandhiji's life of simple living and high thinking be considered ascetic.


References

  1. Bhagavad Gita. VI, 17.

Source: From the book, Mahatma Gandhi: 100 Years


* J B Kripalani (1888-1982), for a time General Secretary of the Indian National Congress and once its President; Founder, Vigil; author of many books on Gandhian themes; Member of the Lok Sabha.