GANDHI AND COMMUNITY LIVING

Siby K. Joseph

Gandhi established four living communities or ashrams during his life time. Of which two communities were in South Africa which he established during his twenty-one years of work and stay there. The remaining two were established in India. The first ashram in India was established after his return to his home country in 1915 and the last one in 1936 at the age of 67 years. The ashram living experiments of Gandhi continued till his last breathe. The establishments of these experimental communities or ashrams were results of particular historical contexts and as a solution to the challenges he had to confront in his eventful public life and action. Ashrams were necessitated due to his larger engagement in socio-economic and political work he was engaged in those days. His concept of community living or ashram was an ever evolving one. By examining his evolving thoughts on ashram living one can see how he improved upon on his vision of good life in his consistent quest for truth. These ashram communities were established to enact upon the ideal of sarvodaya or universal welfare, which gripped his mind at a younger age.

Gandhi's home at Phoenix Settlement, Inanda, Durban

Let us look how the idea of community living germinated in his mind in a foreign land or it was ingrained in his persona? Young Mohandas Gandhi went to South Africa in search of better prospects as a lawyer in 1893. Even after the completion of the work within a year he could not come back to India because he decided to fight against racial discrimination staying back in South Africa. However, he started living with his family in the beautiful Beach Grove Villa in Durban only in 1897. His life even those days was not an ordinary householder who was leading a life of enjoyment. It can be observed that during this period his clerks often stayed with him and his house was open to the most distressed person usually neglected by the society. He was happy to welcome a person afflicted with leprosy in his house and take care of him for some time. Gandhi himself explained his inclination for an ashram way of living in the following words “As soon as I had a house of my own, my house was an ashram in this sense, for my life as a householder was not one of enjoyment but of duty discharged from day to day. Again besides the members of my family I always had some friends or others living with me, whose relation with me was spiritual from the first or became such later on.”1 But this went on unconsciously till the establishment of his first experimental community known as Phoenix Settlement at Inanda, Durban in 1904.

Phoenix Settlement Community

The Phoenix Settlement

It was established in December 1904 on a farm which is situated on the north-western edge of Inanda, approximately 26 kilometers away from Durban in South Africa. It is considered as the first ashram of Gandhi. This Settlement was established to put into practice the ideals of John Ruskin’s work Unto This Last and to run Indian Opinion, a publication which he started in the year 1903 to serve the interests of Indian community there. His ideas on community living emerged from this experiment and it took definite shape in the course of time during his life in South Africa and later in India

Gandhi in his Autobiography recalls how he arrived at the idea of settlement. When he was about to leave for Durban from Johannesburg, his friend H.S.L. Polak gave him a copy of John Ruskin’s “Unto This Last.” The train journey was of twenty four hours and Gandhi read the whole book during the journey. The reading of Ruskin’s work brought about an instantaneous and practical transformation in the life of Gandhi. He took a firm resolve change his life in accordance with the ideals of the book. The main teachings of the book according to Gandhi were

1. That the good of the individual is contained in the good of all.

2. That a lawyer's work has the same value as the barber's inasmuch as all have the same right of earning their livelihood from their work.

3. That a life of labour, i.e. the life of the tiller of the soil and the handicraftsman is the life worth living.

He knew the first of these and the second one he had dimly realized. The third one never occurred to him. Ruskin’s work made it clear to him as daylight that the second and the third were contained in the first. Gandhi discussed with Albert West effect Unto This Last produced on his mind. Gandhi proposed the idea of a settlement on which everyone should labour, drawing the same living wage. He also suggested that Indian Opinion should be removed to a farm and the inmates attending to the press work in spare time. It was only practical solution to run Indian Opinion which was facing financial problems. The monthly allowance per head, irrespective of colour or nationality was laid down as £3.

Thereafter Gandhi advertised for a piece of land situated near a railway station in the vicinity of Durban and an offer came in respect of Phoenix. He purchased the 100 acres of land, with a spring and few orange and mango trees, for1000 pounds. In the editorial of Indian Opinion in December1904, Gandhi announced the decision to move the paper to Phoenix in which “the workers could live a more simple and natural life, and the ideas of Ruskin and Tolstoy be combined with strict business principles”. The writings of Leo Tolstoy, who gave up all his wealth and embraced a life of poverty and labour had an important influence on Gandhi. A visit to the Mariannhill Trappist Monastery in 1894 had also left a deep impression on Gandhi’s mind about community living. The Phoenix community consisted of daily workers who were paid an outright wage and the “schemers” who were given an acre of land each, a house, and a monthly allowance of £ 3 per month for working in the press and a share of the profits, if any. This Settlement was based on principles of self-reliance, the value of labour and communitarian living for the common good of people. In addition to the International Printing Press which brought out the Indian Opinion, the settlement featured a school and homes, including his cottage, where he lived with his family. The inmates made houses with corrugated iron with rough wooden supports. No fencing was made in order to demarcate the plots of inmates other than narrow paths and roads.

Gandhi himself admits the fact that neither the inmates nor anyone else called it as an ashram in the beginning. However it had ‘religious basis’, and its “visible object was purity of body and mind as well as economic equality.” Brahmacharya (chastity) was not essential for becoming a member of the Settlement .On the other hand “it was expected that co-workers would live as family men and have children.”

A momentous decision was taken in the life of Gandhi 1906. It was nothing but the vow of Brahmacharya. The same year also marked the birth of Satyagraha this was land mark in the life of Gandhi. These developments contributed a lot in the gradual evolution of Phoenix from a settlement to an ashram. Gandhi himself explains about it in the following words. “I learnt in the school of experience that brahmacharya was a sine qua non for a life devoted to service. From this time onward I looked upon Phoenix deliberately as a religious institution. The same year witnessed the advent of Satyagraha which was based on religion and implied an unshakable faith in the God of Truth. Religion here should not be understood in a narrow sense, but as that which acts as a link between different religions and realizes their essential unity. … All these years the Phoenix Settlement was progressing as an ashram though we did not call it by that name.”

The Phoenix Settlement also provided an opportunity for Gandhi to experiment his ideas on education in a school environment. He worked out the details of every aspect relating to the school in a note published in Indian Opinion January 9, 1909. Reflecting on Curriculum, he wrote “The main object of this school is to strengthen the pupils’ character. It is said that real education consists in teaching the pupil the art of learning. In other words, a desire for knowledge should grow in him. Knowledge, however, is of many kinds. There is some knowledge which is harmful. If, therefore, the boys’ character is not formed well, they will acquire the wrong kind of knowledge. Because of lack of proper planning in education, we observe that some persons grow to be atheists and some, though highly educated, fall a prey to vices. It is therefore the main object of this school to assist in building the moral character of boys.”

It is believed that the name for the settlement viz. Phoenix was not given by Gandhi. It was Thomas Watkins who owned this farm gave this name. The story behind giving the name was that his first crop of sugarcane was destroyed by fire and he replanted it in the ashes of the crop. Gandhi wrote in a letter to Maganlal Gandhi, on 24 November 1909 about the appropriateness of the settlement’s name.

“Phoenix is a very good word which has come to us without any effort on our part. Being an English word, it serves to pay homage to the land in which we live. Moreover, it is neutral. Its significance, as the legend goes, is that the bird phoenix comes back to life again and again from its own ashes, i.e. it never dies. The name Phoenix, for the present serves the purpose quite well, for we believe the aims of Phoenix will not vanish even when we are turned to dust.”

In 1913, Gandhi made a trust for the management of the Phoenix property. Gandhi’s son Manilal Gandhi played an important role in the running of Indian Opinion and Phoenix Settlement till his death in 1956. The publication of Indian Opinion was discontinued in 1961.

During the apartheid era, it became a busy hub of resistance facilitating the activists who were engaged in the fight for justice, peace and equal rights for all citizens. Large portion of this settlement was damaged during 1985 Inanda riots. South Africa’s first democratic elections were held in the year 1994.Following this the Settlement was rebuilt and it was formally reopened on February 27, 2000, at a ceremony attended by the President of South Africa.

At present the settlement comprises of Gandhi’s house ( Sarvodaya), International Printing Press (which now houses the Inanda Tourism office), Gandhi’s son Manilal’s house and the Phoenix Interpretation Centre, where lectures are being conducted. Next to the Phoenix settlement is the Kasturba Primary School, named after Gandhi’s wife. On the eve of 151st birth anniversary of Gandhi, that is, October 2, 2020, the Phoenix Settlement was declared as a National Heritage Site by the South Africa Heritage Resources Agency.

Tolstoy Farm, Johannesburg

Tolstoy Farm

Tolstoy Farm was the second experiment in community living undertaken by Gandhi which was established near Johannesburg, as a corollary to Phoenix Settlement during the second Satyagraha campaign against the Asiatic Registration Bill popularly known as Black Act. It was mainly to accommodate families of Satyagrahies and to lead a communitarian life which Gandhi described as “cooperative common wealth.” Gandhi wrote in Satyagraha in South Africa “There was only one solution for this difficulty, namely, that all the families should be kept at one place and should become members of a sort of co-operative commonwealth. …the families of Satyagrahis would be trained to live a new and simple life in harmony with one another. Indians belonging to various provinces and professing diverse faiths would have an opportunity of living together.” Gandhi was looking for a suitable place suitable for a settlement of this nature in the Transvaal and near Johannesburg which was mainstay of Satyagraha. He explains the reasons for the selection of the particular site.“ To live in a city would have been like straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. The house rent alone would perhaps amount to the same sum as the food bill, and it would not be easy to live simple life amidst the varied distractions of a city. Again in a city it would be impossible to find a place where many families could prosecute useful industry in their own homes. It was therefore clear that the place selected should be neither too far from nor too near a city. There was of course Phoenix, where Indian Opinion was being printed and where there was some cultivation being carried on. Phoenix was convenient in many other ways, but it was three hundred miles away from Johannesburg and to be reached by a journey of thirty hours. It was therefore difficult and expensive to take the families such a distance and bring them back again. Besides, the families would not be ready to leave their homes for such a far off place, and even if they were ready it seemed impossible to send them as well as the Satyagrahi prisoners on their release.”It was Herman Kallenbach, a Lithuanian born Jewish South African architect and a close friend of Gandhi,who bought a farm of about 1,100 acres and gave the use of it to the Satyagrahis free of any rent or charge on the condition that they will vacate the site on the termination of satyagraha struggle . Thus Tolstoy Farm was established on May 30, 1910 in a site which is located in a southwestern corner of the Johannesburg municipal area, approximately 35 kms from Johannesburg, 2 kms from the Lawley Station.

The name Tolstoy Farm for the settlement was given by Kallenbach in consultation with Gandhi. Like Gandhi Kallenbach was also highly influenced by the teachings of Tolstoy.Gandhi wrote in his letter to Tolstoy the impact of his teachings on Kallenbach. "No writing has so deeply touched Mr. Kallenbach as yours; and as a spur to further effort in living up to the ideals held before the world by you, he has taken the liberty, after consultation with me, of naming his farm after you."

The Tolstoy farm differed from Phoenix in many respects. It shows Gandhi’s progress and evolution towards Ashram life.In the Farm everyone had only shared accommodation separately for men and women. Further instead of each settler cultivating a separate plot of land, it was decided to cultivate jointly to ensure economy in production process and to develop co-operative spirit. It was insisted that not to have any servants either for the household work or as far as might be even for the farming and building operations. Everything starting from cooking to scavenging was done by the inmates. Gandhi wrote “The work before us was to make the Farm a busy hive of industry, thus to save money and in the end to make the families self-supporting.” Tolstoy Farm was an ideal laboratory for fostering community spirit. “The settlers learned to look upon one another as members of the same family, the Satyagrahis secured a pure place of refuge, little scope was left for dishonesty or hypocrisy and the wheat was separated from the tares.”

The farm provided Gandhi to undertake further experiments in the field of education. He wrote “As the Farm grew, it was found necessary to make some provision for the education of its boys and girls. There were, among these, Hindu, Musalman, Parsi and Christian boys and some Hindu girls. It was not possible, and I did not think it necessary, to engage special teachers for them. It was not possible, for qualified Indian teachers were scarce, and even when available, none would be ready to go to a place twenty-one miles distant from Johannesburg on a small salary. Also we were certainly not overflowing with money. And I did not think it necessary to import teachers from outside the Farm. I did not believe in the existing system of education, and I had a mind to find out by experience and experiment the true system. Only this much I knew - that, under ideal conditions, true education could be imparted only by the parents, and that then there should be the minimum of outside help, that Tolstoy Farm was a family, in which I occupied the place of the father, and that I should so far as possible shoulder the responsibility for the training of the young.” His experiment in coeducation was the boldest one and his emphasis was on building character. : “I had always given the first place to the culture of the heart or the building of character, and as I felt confident that moral training could be given to all alike, no matter how different their ages and their upbringing, I decided to live amongst them all the twenty-four hours of the day as their father. I regarded character building as the proper foundation for their education and, if the foundation was firmly laid, I was sure that the children could learn all the other things themselves or with the assistance of friends.”

This settlement played an important place in the prosecution of Satyagraha. Gandhi wrote " Tolstoy Farm proved to be a centre of spiritual purification and penance for the final campaign.I have serious doubts as to whether the struggle could have been prosecuted for eight years, whether we could have secured larger funds, and whether the thousands of men who participated in the last phase of the struggle would have borne their share of it, if there had been no Tolstoy Farm."

The farm was disbanded after the completion of Satyagraha struggle. The ownership was moved from one hand to another in the course of time. At the present the site is owned by a Corobrik brick factory. However, taking note of Tolstoy Farm’s strategic and historic importance the company has given around three and half acres of the land to develop as Gandhi Memorial Garden .

Satyagraha Ashram, Kochrab, Ahmedabad

Satyagraha Ashram, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad

Satyagraha Ashram

His third ashram, which is known as Satyagraha Ashram, was established at Kochrab near Ahmedabad on 25 May 1915 on his return to India from South Africa. It was later shifted to the banks of river Sabarmati on 17 June 1917.Gandhi’s Phoenix party arrived in India before his arrival and they were staying in Rabindranath Tagore’s Shantiniketan. Gandhi too stayed there for a brief period of time and undertook some experiments in self-help which Tagore described as ‘key to swaraj.’ Places like Hardvar, Vaidyanathadham and Rajkot were suggested to him as the location of his ashram but he had a predilection for Ahmedabad “Being a Gujarati I thought I should be able to render the greatest service to the country through the Gujarati language. And then, as Ahmedabad was an ancient centre of handloom weaving, it was likely to be the most favourable field for the revival of the cottage industry of hand-spinning. There was also the hope that, the city being the capital of Gujarat, monetary help from its wealthy citizens would be more available here than elsewhere.”But one has to keep in mind that it was busy hub of mill cloth too. The inmates were accommodated Kochrab bungalow of Jivanlal Desai, a barrister in Ahmedabad, which was hired for the establishment of the ashram.

Gandhi explains in his Autobiography how he arrived at the name Satyagraha Ashram “The first thing we had to settle was the name of the Ashram. I consulted friends. Amongst the names suggested were 'Sevashram' (the abode of service), 'Tapovan' (the abode of austerities), etc. I liked the name 'Sevashram' but for the absence of emphasis on the method of service. 'Tapovan' seemed to be a pretentious title, because though tapas was dear to us we would not presume to be tapasvins (men of austerity). Our creed was devotion to truth, and our business was the search for and insistence on truth. I wanted to acquaint India with the method I had tried in South Africa, and I desired to test in India the extent to which its application might be possible. So my companions and I selected the name 'Satyagraha Ashram', as conveying both our goal and our method of service.” The object of this Ashram was that “its members should qualify themselves for, and make a constant endeavour towards, the service of the country, not inconsistent with universal good.”

For the conduct of the Ashram a code of rules and observances was necessary and Gandhi himself drafted the same, it included Truth, Non-violence, Brahmacharya , Control of the Palate Non-Stealing, Non-Possession, Swadeshi, Fearlessness, Removal of Untouchability,Varnashrama Dharma and Tolerance. Physical labour was added by Gandhi later. It is significant to note what Gandhi wrote about Varnashrama Dharma. He out rightly rejected caste distinctions. “ In the Ashram caste distinction has no place. It is believed that caste distinction has caused harm to the Hindu dharma. The ideas of the superior and inferior status and pollution by contact implied in caste distinction serves to destroy the dharma of non-violence. However, the Ashram does believe in Varna and the Ashram dharma. The division of Varna is based upon occupation. One who follows that division lives by his parents’ occupation, not inconsistent with larger dharma, and spends his spare time in acquiring and advancing true knowledge as well as performing service. The Ashram believes, as in the Varna, so in the four Ashrams of the Brahmacharya, Grihastha, Vanprastha, and Sanyasa. But the Ashram does not believe that life of renunciation can be lived in a forest only or by giving up performance of one’s duties. The Ashram believes that dharma of renunciation can be and should be observed while leading a normal life and that it alone is true renunciation.”

The new location of the Ashram at the banks of river Sabarmati according to mythology was the ashram site of Dadhichi Rishi who had donated his bones for a righteous war and was engaged in such war through the weapon of nonviolence.It is located between a jail and a crematorium and Gandhi believed that a satyagrahi has to invariably go to either place. The Ashram at Sabarmati was the home of Gandhi from 1917 until 1930.It served as epicenter of the India’s struggle for freedom. It was also from here on the 12 March 1930 that Gandhi launched the famous Dandi march 241 miles from the Ashram (with 78 companions) in protest of the British Salt Law that finally led to disbanding of the ashram and rededicating it for the cause of Harijans . Therefore, it is also known as Harijan Ashram.

The places of attraction in this ashram include a small cottage which is now known as 'Hridaya (Heart) Kunj where Gandhi lived in Nandini,old Ashram guest house,Vinoba Kutir named after Acharya Vinoba Bhave who stayed here, and also known as Mira Kutir after Madeline Slade (Miraben), Gandhi's disciple, daughter of a British Admiral. Upasana Mandir-an open-air prayer ground, situated between 'Hridaya Kunj' and 'Magan Kutir' (the hut where Maganlal Gandhi, the ashram manager, used to stay. An important feature of the Ashram is Gandhi Sangrahalaya, a museum whichhas five units and a library, two photo-galleries and an auditorium.The Ashram remains as a source of inspiration and guidance, and stands as a monument to Gandhi’s life mission and a testimony of his nonviolent struggles.

Sevagram Ashram, Wardha

Mahatma Gandhi in front of his hut at Sevagram

Sevagram Ashram

Sevagram is the fourth ashram established by Mahatma Gandhi. The word Sevagram literally means the village of service. Mahatma left Satyagraha ashram on 12th March 1930 in the wake of historical Salt March with a solemn vow that he will return to the Ashram only when India gets independence from the foreign yoke or the British rule. It goes to the credit of Jamnalal Bajaj, who is regarded as the fifth son of Mahatma, for persuading Gandhi to settle down in Wardha and support Gandhi in the establishment of Ashram at Sevagram . Gandhi on his release from Yervada Jail came to Wardha on September 23, 1933. He stayed in Bajajwadi that was the residence of Jamnalal Bajaj, which later turned into a national guest house for workers and leaders of freedom struggle. He started his Harijan tour from here on November 7 and it was in Nagpur he declared on the 8th that “removal of untouchablity is my religion”. He returned to Wardha again on August 7, 1934 and stayed in Satyagraha Ashram of Vinoba Bhave at Wardha, presently the Mahila Ashram. It was during this period Gandhi decided to retire from the Indian National Congress. Finally, he resigned from the Congress on the 29th of October. He decided to devote all his energies for the uplift of villages. On December 15, 1934, the All India Village Industries Association was formed at Wardha. Jamnalal Bajaj had donated twenty acres of land and a house to Gandhi which was later renamed as Maganwadi in the memory of Maganlal Gandhi, which became the headquarters of All India Village Industries Association.

The first village development work under the guidance of Mahatma was started at a small village known as Sindi. But he was in search of a typical village and it was Madeline Slade (Miraben),a disciple of Gandhi from Britain, who selected the village Segaon, about four miles to the east of Wardha town. This village is in central part of India around 75 kms.away from Nagpur . On April 30, 1936, Mahatma made this village Segaon as his home. He stayed in a makeshift arrangement under a guava tree there as his hut was not ready at that time. On his first visit, he stayed here only for a couple of days. It is pertinent to note his concept of ashram underwent drastic changes during the Sevagram phase. He was 67 years old and he was not in favour of creating ashram as a community of people away from the village. In fact he wanted to convert the whole village into an ashram. He wanted to stay alone in the village and Kasturba could join if she wanted. But in the course of time it was taking the form of an ashram. There was another place known as Shegaon and the letters addressed to Gandhi went there. Therefore, in 1940 the village was renamed as Sevagram.

Sevagram Ashram differs from his others ashrams in terms of approach and its appearance. This ashram clearly depicts his ideological evolution and changing approach to life and philosophy. He wrote in Harijan in 1936. "You may be sure I am living now just the way I wish to live. What I might have done at the beginning, had I more light, I am doing now in the evening of my life, at the end of my career, building from the bottom up. Study my way of living here, study my surroundings, if you wish to know what I am. Village improvement is the only foundation on which conditions in India can be permanently ameliorated."

Gandhi wanted his hut to be built using the materials available within the radius of 75 kms. and the cost not to exceed more than hundred rupees. Gandhiji’s hut was built as per his wish and his first hut was renamed as Adi Nivas after his death. This hut witnessed many important meetings and discussions which determined the future of India. The idea of Quit India movement took its shape in the first meeting held here. Similarly the preliminary deliberations of Individual Satyagraha were also held in this iconic building.

In the course of time a number of buildings and additional facilities were added to the Ashram like a hut for Kasturba Gandhi,the well known Bapukuti, which was originally used by Miraben and expanded as per the requirements of Gandhi, open prayer ground, his last residence, Prachure kuti built for treating a leprosy affected person, huts for his secretaries and other buildings.

He explained to his Polish engineer friend Maurice Frydman why he was in a village like Sevagram with bare minimum facilities: "I am here to serve no one else but myself, to seek my own self- realisation though the service of these village folk…. The service to human beings becomes a necessary part of the endeavour, simply because the only way to find God is to see Him in his creation and try to be one with it. This can only be done by service to all. One has to serve the world through service to one’s own country." This village became a symbol of Gandhi’s ideal of village service.

In 1937, Gandhi came up with his ideas on Basic education which aimed at the all round development of body, mind and spirit. His scheme of Basic education was implemented throughout the country. It was during his Sevagram phase, he became more convinced about the efficacy of constructive work along with Satyagraha and in 1940s he came up with his 18 fold constructive programme for the reconstruction of Indian villages. Thus Sevagram Ashram was the laboratory for ideas and action

Gandhi left Sevagram Ashram for Delhi on his way to Noakhali on 25th August 1946. From Noakhali he returned to Delhi and was hoping to return to Sevagram on 2nd February1948. But unfortunately he was assassinated by a religious fundamentalist and that put an abrupt end to his life. But his life and message continues to remain a source of inspiration for people all over the globe. Sevagram ashram is a place of pilgrimage to understand his philosophy and life.

Due to Gandhi’s presence, Sevagram/Wardha became the de-facto capital of India and it became a busy hub of a number of organizations and institutions including Mahila Seva Mandal,Magan Sangrahalaya, Rashtra Basha Prachar Samity and many others. After Gandhi’s death Vinoba Bhave, Gandhi’s spiritual heir guided the Gandhian activities from his ashram at Paunar in Wardha. A number of institutions were established on similar lines even after the martyrdom of Gandhi that makes Sevagram/Wardha unique in the history of India.

Gandhi’s ashram at Sevagram declares to the world the values of simplicity, limitation of wants and life in tune with nature. It continues to remain as a source of inspiration for ordinary people to noted philosophers and thinkers. In January 1978, Ivan Illich a Croatian – Austrian philosopher came to Sevagram to inaugurate a conference. At the inaugural speech he talked about the message of Bapu’s hut. “ Today in the morning while I was sitting in this hut where Mahatma Gandhi lived, I was trying to absorb the spirit of this concept and imbibe in me its message. There are two things about the hut which have impressed me greatly. One is its spiritual aspect and the other is the aspect of his amenities. I was trying to understand Gandhi’s point of view in regard to making the hut, I very much liked its simplicity, beauty and neatness. The hut proclaims the principle of love and equality with everybody. …This hut of Gandhi demonstrates to the world how the dignity of the common man can be brought up. It is also a symbol of happiness which we can derive from practicing the principles of simplicity, service and truthfulness.”

The inmates of the Ashram follow a lifestyle in accordance with eleven vows prescribed by Gandhi. Sevagram ashram receives a number of visitors from India and abroad and hosts a number of conferences, seminars, symposiums for people looking for alternatives and those engaged in creating a society based on values of peace, nonviolence and social justice. This ashram will become more and more important in days to come taking into consideration the emerging challenges which humanity is facing.

Session -2

GANDHI’S VISION OF ASHRAM
Siby K. Joseph

If we trace the history of Ashram, it existed in India for a quite long time and mostly associated with Hinduism. Historically, ashrams were located in remote places, often in forests or mountain ranges far away from the rest of the community. It was considered as a place of a religious retreat or hermitage where people who have withdrawn from society live together as a group. The word Ashram first appeared in English in the early 1900s. It gained popularity only after Mahatma founded his famous ashrams viz. Satyagraha Ashram near Ahmedabad and later Sevagram Ashram, Wardha.² Gandhi’s experiments in ashram or community living changed its very connotation and way in which was it was looked upon earlier.

Gandhi was not using the term ashram to denote his community living experiments while he was in South Africa. After returning to India in 1915 with due thought and deliberation he arrived at the definite idea of the Ashram when he settled down at Kochrab near Ahmedabad. What was Gandhi’s notion of Ashram? In simple words for him it was “a community of men of religion.” Here the term religion should be understood in the sense of spirituality. During his stay at Satyagraha Ashram near Ahmedabad, Gandhi while on an evening walk looking at the Sabarmati Central Prison jokingly said, "This is our other Ashram”. He further said:"In our Ashram there are no walls. The only walls we have are those of Ashram disciplines. But unlike the prison walls they do not imprison but protect us and release us into greater freedom. It is only when we observe spiritual disciplines voluntarily that we experience real freedom. Armed with them, we can go anywhere, face any emergency and never feel baffled. For instance, our life in the Ashram is supposed to be harder than prison life. We have no possessions of which anyone can deprive us. Imprisoned we shall miss no delights of the palate or any other physical indulgence having accustomed ourselves to plain fare and the simple life. We shall fear none because we shall have learnt to walk in the fear of God only, and we shall gladly die witness to truth; we shall never repudiate it."These words of Gandhi help the reader to understand what Gandhi’s vision of ashram was.

What was main object of Gandhi’s Satyagraha Ashram? According to Gandhi “The object of this Ashram is that its members should qualify themselves for, and make a constant endeavour towards, the service of the country, not inconsistent with universal good.” From the experience in ashram living in South Africa he realized that the observances of vows were essential for the fulfillment of the very object of the Ashram life. He systematized the vows for the inmates of his ashrams. The draft constitution of the Ashram which Gandhi prepared in 1915 lists the vows of truth, nonviolence, brahmacharya, control of palate, non-stealing, non-possession, swadeshi and fearlessness. In the third draft he included the vow against practise of untouchability taking note of harsh social realities prevailing in India those days. Each improvement in the draft was the result of mature reflection and demands of the particular situation he confronted.

Gandhi emphasized the importance of observance of vows and disciplined way of life as necessary conditions for anyone who would like to become a member of his ashram and they were expected to follow them even after his demise. It was evident from the rules he penned down for Sevagram Ashram at the last leg of his life. He intended that the vows and norms of discipline to be there forever. He wrote that the life members should sign the following pledge."We the undersigned believe in the necessity of keeping the eleven observances, and will endeavour to do so to the best of our ability. We will live in the Ashram till death even when Gandhiji is no longer with us in the flesh and will perform the duties assigned to us." In this write up Gandhi reflected on almost every aspect of day to day life in the ashram. This document is considered as his last will and testament in matters regarding ashram life. (For details See Appendix : Rules for Sevagram Ashram)

In fact Gandhi's Ashrams served as ideal laboratories for experiments of personal purification by inmates which equipped them for socio-economic and political actions for the creation of nonviolent, equitable, just and peaceful society. Mark Thomson, the author of the book, Gandhi and his Ashrams explains the significance of Gandhi’s initiatives of ashram life both in South Africa and India in the following words: "The ashrams Gandhi established served as laboratories where he and his colleagues experimented with nonviolence as an alternative way of life. In these small monastic communities of men and women living according to absolute vows he sought to lay the ground-work for an egalitarian social organization and economy, and to develop an education system that reflected the Indian genius. The ashrams provided economic and moral support as well as fostering the discipline and awareness necessary for their members to sustain grassroot civil disobedience. Gandhi saw the need in the tradition-bound, rigidly hierarchical Indian society, for a moral sanction able to inspire people to help themselves. He believed ashramic life, based on mutuality, simplicity and hard work, would nurture an asceticism that could be channelled through positive action to reform society"

Ashram life both in South Africa and India played an important role in moulding the personality of Gandhi from an Inner Temple lawyer to Mahatma or Bapu of common masses. The greatest contribution of Mahatma Gandhi is that through his community experiments he changed the very notion of the Ashram. In his experiments with Ashram he linked it with issues confronted by people in their mundane life. James D. Hunt, Gandhi scholar from America aptly said “The Gandhian communities never were retreats from the world; they were attempts to change the world. In the context of community life, new directions could be discerned, and the small community could offer new visions to the larger community.”

In short, ashrams established by Gandhi were spiritual laboratories in nonviolence equipping the inmates for nonviolent and constructive action. The rules and discipline of the ashram helped the inmates to achieve the goal of harmonious integration of body, mind and spirit and making them perfect instruments of service not inconsistent with universal welfare. Through a disciplined way of life and the ashram observances Gandhi could create an army of satyagrahis who were able to face the toughest challenge even by risking their life. The classic example was Salt March of 1930 which showed exemplary fearlessness which literally shook the foundation of British rule in India. It also marked the termination of his experiments in ashram life in Ahmedabad. But it was not the end of his experiments in community living because ashram life was a part and parcel of his persona.

Appendix

Rules for Sevagram Ashram

Life members of the Ashram are those who believe in the necessity of keeping the eleven observances, and endeavour to do so to the best of their ability, and who will stay in the Ashram even after Gandhiji's death and render lifelong service through the activities of the Ashram.

The names of those who come under this category should be placed on record. They should sign the following pledge:

"We the undersigned believe in the necessity of keeping the eleven observances, and will endeavour to do so to the best of our ability. We will live in the Ashram till death even when Gandhiji is no longer with us in the flesh and will perform the duties assigned to us."

The second class of inmates is those who have joined the Ashram for service. They are non-permanent members. And the third class is visitors and guests who come to the Ashram for a short time.

One of the life members shall be the manager. He will be selected by Gandhiji. After his [Gandhiji's] death, and on the manager ceasing for some reason to hold that office, the life members shall elect a new manager.

The manager shall have charge of the entire administration of the Ashram and assign to the inmates their respective duties. As far as possible, the manager will try to obtain the consent of the life members in doing this.

The Ashram accounts shall be duly kept, and audited once a year. The statement of accounts shall be sent to the trustees of the Ashram and to the President of the Gandhi Seva Sangh.

The rules deducible from the observances and essential for a well-regulated Ashram life are as follows:
All members - whether permanent or otherwise - will turn every minute of their time to good account. They will take part in every corporate activity of the Ashram. When free from Ashram work they will spin or carry out some other process connected with cotton. They will prosecute their private studies from 8 to 9 p.m., or during daytime, when they have no Ashram work to do and have spun for at least one hour.

They may not spin when they are ill or otherwise unable to spin owing to circumstances beyond their control.

No one should talk idly or in a loud voice. The Ashram must bear the impress of perfect peace as well as of truth. Our relations with one another must be characterized by affection and restraint and with guests and visitors by courtesy. Whether a visitor is dressed in rags or in gorgeous robes, we should treat him with uniform respect. We must not make any distinction between the rich and the poor, the noble and the simple. This does not mean that we may expect a delicately nurtured guest to live as simply as ourselves. That is to say, in waiting upon guests, we must always take into consideration their habitual mode of life. This is true courtesy. If an unknown visitor arrives at the Ashram we must ask him the purpose of his visit, and if necessary, take him to the manager.

Our every word and every act should be well thought out. Whatever we do we must do with a will and complete identification with what we are doing at the moment. For instance we must not talk at meals or while cutting vegetables.

Food must be taken like medicine, under proper restraint, only for sustaining the body and keeping it a fit instrument for service. We must therefore take food in moderation or even abstemiously. We must be content with what food we get. If it is insufficiently or badly cooked, we must not talk about it at meals, but courteously speak about it later to the manager of the kitchen. Bad or imperfectly cooked food should not be eaten.
We must not smack the lips while eating. We must eat our food slowly, decorously and neatly in a spirit of thankfulness to God.

Everyone must wash his own dish thoroughly and keep it in its place.Guests and visitors are requested to bring their own plate, drinking pot, bowls and spoon, as well as lantern, bedding, mosquito net and napkins. They must not have more clothes than necessary. Their clothes should be made of khadi. Other things must be as far as possible village-made or at least Swadeshi.

Everything must be kept in its proper place. All refuse must be put into the dustbin. Water must not be wasted. Boiled water is used for drinking purposes. Pots and pans are finally washed with boiled water. Unboiled water of the Ashram wells is not safe to drink. It is necessary to learn the distinction between boiling water and hot water. Boiling water is that with which pulses are cooked, and which gives out lots of steam. No one can drink boiling water. We should not spit or clean the nose on the road, but only in an out of the way place where no one is likely to walk.

Nature's needs must be attended to only at the appointed place. It is necessary to clean oneself after answering both the calls of nature. The receptacle for the solid contents is, as it should always be, different from that for the liquid contents of latrines. After a visit to the latrine, we must wash our hands with pure earth and pure water and wipe them with a clean napkin. The night soil must be fully covered with dry earth so as not to attract flies and in such a way that nothing but dry earth is visible.

One must sit carefully on the latrine seat, so that the seat does not get dirty. A lantern must be carried if it is dark.

Everything which can attract the fly should be properly covered.

The teeth must be cleaned with care at the proper place. The end of the twig must be well chewed into a soft brush, and the teeth and the gums must be brushed with it both ways. The saliva discharged during brushing, must be spitted out. After the teeth are well brushed, the twig must be split into two to clean the tongue with- Then the mouth should be carefully washed. The split twigs should be washed well, and collected in a pot. When they dry up, they should be used for starting a fire, the idea being that nothing which can be used should be thrown away.
Waste paper, which cannot be used for writing on the other side, should be burned. Nothing else should be mixed with it.

The fragments of vegetables must be kept separate and converted into manure. Broken glass should be thrown into a pit at a safe distance from houses.

Rules for Sevagram Ashram were written by Mahatma Gandhi at the last phase of his life. It originally appeared in Harijan on October 31, 1948. It is considered as Gandhi’s last will and testament on Ashram life. Source: M. K. Gandhi, Ashram observances in Action ( Ahmedabad :Navajivan)

This Note was prepared by Dr. Siby K. Joseph, Director, Sri Jamnalal Bajaj Memorial Library and Research Centre for Gandhian Studies, Sevagram Ashram Pratishthan, Sevagram,Wardha- 442102, Maharashtra (INDIA)

Email: directorjbmlrc@gmai l.com

To download the book

https://sevagramashram.org.in/index.php/2023/01/23/ashrams-of-gandhi-and-lanza-del-vasto/

Gandhi in South Africa: A Racist?

Siby Kollappallil Joseph

Part -I

There is a general dissatisfaction with the existing social order in which live. The search for an alternative way of organizing society with a new life style has become a major concern and engagement of the scholars and thinkers all over the world. Gandhi’s life and his ideas are being widely discussed to provide an alternative socio-economic, politico model of development. However, because of Gandhi’s centrality to present intellectual discourse, his life and ideas are being dissected to their barest minimum. Only in this context some scholars are engaged in pointing out the so-called seamy side of his life and ideas at times even taking some of his actions and writings out of context. Gandhi hardly needs any defence in the face of such unreasonable attacks. But his words and actions of South African days would have to be contextualized to then prevailing social situations for a correct and proper reappraisal. With such a mindset one could really make a proper assessment of Gandhi’s contributions relating to his South African days. However, here our attempt would be primarily confined to reviewing and reassessing whether there was any racist element in his words and actions during those days. In the process of this analysis, one could really reach to a conclusion whether the accusation of Gandhi being a racist is a myth or reality.

Of late, Gandhi’s approach to race and the problem of racial discrimination especially in the South African phase have been subjected to severe criticism by a section of scholars, intellectuals and activists. This view gathered momentum during the centenary celebrations of Gandhi’s return to India from South Africa in 2015. It provided an opportunity to revisit Gandhi’s eventful life in South Africa including his approach to matters relating to race and racial discrimination. It was none other than Arundhati Roy, in her introduction titled ‘The Doctor and The Saint’[i]to the annotated edition of Annihilation of Caste originally written by B. R. Ambedkar, raised the issues related to Gandhi’s approach to caste and race. It is interesting to note that she again raised some of these issues while delivering a lecture at the University of Kerala in the memory of Mahatma Ayyankali, a renowned dalit leader of the State. In the course of her speech, she castigated Gandhi for his racist and casteist approach. She even demanded that it was high time that all institutions named after Gandhi be rechristened.[ii]

On similar lines, a book viz. The South African Gandhi: Stretcher Bearer of Empire was published simultaneously both in India and United States. This book was written by Ashwin Desai and Goolam Vahed, scholars of Indian origin associated with South African universities. They argue that Gandhi during his two decade long stay in South Africa “remained true to Empire while expressing disdain for Africans. For Gandhi, whites and Indians were bound by an Aryan bloodline that had no place for the African. His racism was matched by his class (and caste) prejudice towards the Indian indentured.” [iii] It was further fuelled with the installation of Gandhi statue in Ghana and the attempt to install Gandhi bust in Malawi by the Indian government. As a result of these developments, this issue was widely discussed in print and electronic media and created a feeling in a section of people that Gandhi was an ardent racist. It is true that his views on race and racial discrimination are to some extent likely to produce confusions and controversies, if it is analysed out of spatio- temporal context. Therefore, it is necessary to analyse Gandhi’s thinking and actions in regard to race and racial discriminations especially in South Africa and their evolutions, if any, in the course of his life.

Those scholars, who accuse Gandhi of being a racist, are of two categories. One, Gandhi was a racist at the initial stage of his life in South Africa and he underwent drastic changes at a later stage. The second one is that he remained as a racist throughout his stay in South Africa. Let us look at both the cases. For example, noted historian Ramachandra Guha wrote an essay in the Wire viz. “Setting the Record Straight on Gandhi and Race” on December 23, 2018. His main argument is that “In his 20s, Gandhi was unquestionably a racist. He believed in a hierarchy of civilisations, with Europeans at the top, Indians just below them and Africans absolutely at the bottom. He spoke of the native inhabitants of Africa in patronising and even pejorative language. However, by the time he was in his mid 30s, Gandhi no longer spoke of Africans as inferior to Indians.”[iv]

Contesting Ramachandra Guha’s argument Ashwin Desai wrote a piece in the Wire on January 5, 2019 viz. “Guha’s Story of Gandhi in South Africa Does Not Square with the Record”.[v] He argues that “Ramachandra Guha’s Gandhi Before India published in 2013 was received with much consternation in South Africa. This was because in Guha’s quest to portray the South African Gandhi as a cosmopolitan anti-colonial fighter and apostle of non-racialism, he wrote out of history the brutal subjugation of Africans and the myriad resistances against the Imperial army. He turned a blind eye to Gandhi’s ‘anti-African’ racism and support for the right of the white minority to hold political power.”According to Desai much after 1906 Gandhi continued to castigate and belittle Africans. Similarly, Obadele Kambon, associated with University of Ghana wrote an article in The Print on January 27, 2019 viz. “Ram Guha is wrong. Gandhi went from a racist young man to a racist middle-aged man”[vi]

As the controversies and misconceptions were mainly centred on his life and work in South Africa, the scope of analysis will be limited to that phase only. It was in 1893 Gandhi had gone to South Africa in search of a better prospect as a lawyer. There he came face to face with racial discrimination even during the initial stages of his stay. For instance, when he visited the Durban Court, the magistrate ordered him to take off his turban (headgear) which Gandhi refused and walked out of the Court. It was while travelling from Durban to Pretoria with a first class train ticket; he was literally thrown out of the compartment at the Pietermaritzburg railway station. He faced further insults in the subsequent coach journey. He was even refused accommodation in Grand National Hotel in Johannesburg. It is to be noted that Gandhi was a representative of British Indians and according to Queens Victoria’s proclamation of 1858; all imperial subjects were entitled for equality. However, Gandhi had to face severe racial discrimination during his stay in South Africa. But it is surprising that critics like Arundhati Roy argue that “Gandhi was not offended by racial discrimination.”[vii]

After the successful completion of his work as a lawyer Gandhi was supposed to come back to India in 1894. To honour him, a farewell party was arranged on the eve of his return journey to India in April 1894. It was in the farewell party; Gandhi came across a news item in Natal Mercury about the proposed Bill by the Natal Government to disenfranchise Indians. It was on the request of the people of Indian origin gathered in the farewell party that Gandhi decided to stay back and take up the case of blatant racial discrimination. Within couple of months, he took the initiative to form the Natal Indian Congress in South Africa in August 1894. The NIC was committed to welfare of all sections of Indians living in South Africa including indentured labourers too. Roy’s reference to Natal Indian Congress (NIC) being an elitist organization[viii] is presented in such a way as if it is a new discovery by her. The fact is that Gandhi himself had admitted in his Autobiography that “Although the members of the Natal Indian Congress included the colonial-born Indians and the clerical class, the unskilled wage-earners, the indentured labourers were still outside its pale. The Congress was not yet theirs. They could not afford to belong to it by paying the subscription and becoming its members.” [ix] Roy even forgets that even Indian National Congress which was constituted as early as 1885 had remained an elitist club as late as 1920. What is more, Roy again indulges in pick and choose even in respect of the membership fee of Natal Indian Congress. To make it appear more elitist, she underlines the fact that its membership was three pounds without mentioning whether it was monthly or yearly membership. She also fails to mention the fact that it had a monthly membership of 5 shillings. The fact underlined by Roy that NIC was an elitist club can be easily controverted by perusal of the report of NIC prepared and presented by Gandhi as its General Secretary in August 1894.[x]That report gives a brief summary of things NIC has done for the indentured labourers. Ignoring all these documentary evidences, Roy sticks to her unsubstantiated position that Gandhi and NIC always distanced themselves from indentured labourers.

It is an undeniable fact that Gandhi was basically taking up issues of people of Indian origin. But at the same time he has no disdain for Africans and he was very much concerned about the question of colour discrimination inflicted upon people whether it was on Indians or natives of Africa from the very beginning of his public life in South Africa. He raised voice against the British policy of denying rights on the basis of the colour of the skin whether it is Indian or Black population. While fighting for the rights of franchise of Indians, Gandhi wrote in a letter to the Editor, The Times of Natal, dated October 25, 1894 “The Indians do not regret that capable Natives can exercise the franchise. They would regret if it were otherwise. They, however, assert that they too, if capable, should have the right. You, in your wisdom, would not allow the Indian or the Native the precious privilege under any circumstances, because they have a dark skin. You would look to the exterior only. So long as the skin is white, it would not matter to you whether it conceals beneath it poison or nectar. To you the lip-prayer of the Pharisee, because he is one, is more acceptable than the sincere repentance of the publican, and this, I presume, you would call Christianity. You may; it is not Christ's.”

Further he asserts that racial or colour discrimination is against the principles of Jesus Christ or Christianity. “Suffer little children to come unto me,” said the Master. His disciples (?) in the Colony would improve upon the saying by inserting “white” after “little”. During the children's fete, organized by the Mayor of Durban, I am told there was not a single coloured child to be seen in the procession. Was this a punishment for the sin of being born of coloured parents? Is this an incident of the qualified citizenship you would accord to the hated “Rammysammy.’’ If He came among us, will he not say to many of us, “I know you not”? Sir, may I venture to offer a suggestion? Will you reread your New Testament? Will you ponder over your attitude towards the coloured population of the Colony? Will you then say you can reconcile it with the Bible teaching or the best British traditions? If you have washed your hands clean of both Christ and British traditions, I can have nothing to say; I gladly withdraw what I have written. Only it will then be a sad day for Britain and for India if you have many followers.”[xi]

Again in his “Open Letter” which Gandhi wrote around December 19, 1894 to the Hon. Members of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly he drew their attention on the question of racial discrimination “I suppose there can be no doubt that the Indian is a despised being in the Colony, and that every opposition to him proceeds directly from that hatred. If that hatred is simply based upon his colour, then, of course, he has no hope. The sooner he leaves the Colony the better. No matter what he does, he will never have the white skin.”[xii]

Therefore, the argument that Gandhi was an ardent racist in the initial stage of his life in South Africa and he was not offended by racial discrimination is not supported by his actions or his utterances during that period. From a cursory look at Gandhi’s life in South Africa, one can find that it was a period of intense transformation in terms of his evolution of personality and the world of ideas. Here we are seeing an inexperienced person who was not capable of arguing a case in the Indian court becoming the sole voice of the people of Indian origin. It is true that to some extent major developments in the world affected his thought process and his approach to issues. What is pertinent to note is that in certain cases he went far ahead of times and no Indian could think or even imagine about such ideas which have revolutionary implications. It was also a period of intense personal transformation. It was in the South African soil he took vow of Bramacharya and undertook experiments in community living through Phoenix Settlement and Tolstoy Farm. At the societal level, he evolved a strategy expressed in the form of satyagraha which turned out to be quite effective in meeting the challenge of racial discrimination.

In the world of his ideas also one can see the influence of prominent thinkers of those days. That is also true in the case of evolving his approach to race and racial discrimination. In some cases, he found enforcement his of ideas in some others writings of eminent personalities of that time. John Finot’s classic work Race Prejudice helped Gandhi to understand the intricacies of race and broadening his vision on the issue of racism. Anil Nauriya emphasized this point in one of his articles. He wrote, “An important French influence dating from his South Africa years, which on matters of race was perhaps more pointed and therefore efficacious than that of any of the other writers he had read till then, is, oddly enough, less widely known. This is that of Jean Finot (1858-1922) whose work “Race Prejudice” had been commended in Gandhi’s journal Indian Opinion on September 7, 1907. Earlier, on March 9, 1907, The New York Times had described Finot as a “French iconoclast on race prejudice”. Finot’s work against racial prejudice had a significant impact on Gandhi; it accelerated his transformation in South Africa from one who was seeking equality (of Indians) with Europeans to one who spoke in terms of equality for all. This is an element in the sources of his intellectual make-up that has not received adequate attention, even if Gandhi’s mind was already working in this direction.”[xiii] Gandhi wanted to popularise the ideas of Finot even among people who came in contact with him[xiv] and reference to Finot can be seen in his Indian days too.[xv]

Gandhi’s changing vision was very much revealed in one of his speeches in the Y.M.C.A., Johannesburg, on the question, “Are Asiatics and the Coloured races a menace to the Empire?” He said “We hear nowadays a great deal of the segregation policy, as if it were possible to put people in water-tight compartments….I have said that the African races have undoubtedly served the Empire, and I believe so have the Asiatic races or, rather, British Indians. Have not the British Indians fought on many a battle-field? A people, moreover, who have religion as the basis of life, cannot be a menace. And how can the African races be a menace? They are still in the history of the world’s learners. Able-bodied and intelligent men as they are, they cannot but be an asset to the Empire. I believe with Mr. Creswell that they ought not to be protected. We do not want protection for them in any shape or form, but I do believe this—that they are entitled to justice, a fair field and no favour. Immediately you give that to them, you will find no difficulty. Whilst, therefore, Asiatics and other Coloured people cannot be a menace, Asiatics at least have been made a menace in some Colonies.” In the concluding part of his speech he said “If we look into the future, is it not a heritage we have to leave to posterity, that all the different races commingle and produce a civilization that perhaps the world has not yet seen? There are difficulties and misunderstandings, but I do believe, in the words of the sacred hymn, “We shall know each other better when the mists have rolled away.”[xvi] These types of progressive ideas never came from the mouth any Indian in the year 1908.

Though Gandhi could not participate in the Universal Races Congress of 1911, his close associate, H.S.L. Polak spoke at the same Congress in London. The Universal Races Congress, which Indian Opinion described as a “Parliament of Man”, discussed the racial question in its various aspects. [xvii] Gandhi, Olive Schreiner, the Coloured Peoples’ leader Dr A Abdurahman and the African lawyer Alfred Mangena (who would be one of the founders of the future African National Congress), among others, were among those from South Africa who were on the Honorary General Committee of the Universal Races Congress. If Gandhi was an ardent racist in South Africa, how his name was included in the Honorary General Committee of the Universal Races Congress? On the contrary, it gives an impression that he was very progressive in his approach to matters relating to race.

Part II

Let us examine some of the important issues raised by the critics one by one. As stated in the beginning, one of the main arguments of Desai and Vahed was that “For Gandhi, whites and Indians were bonded by an Aryan bloodline that had no place for the African.” They titled the second Chapter of the book viz. “Brown over the Black” mainly to substantiate this argument. The Chapter starts with a quote from Gandhi. “History says that the Aryans’ home was not India but they came from Central Asia, and one family migrated to India and colonized it, the others to Europe. The government of that day was, so history says, a civilized government in the truest sense of the term. The whole Aryan literature grew up then….. When other nations were hardly formed, India was at its zenith, and the Indians of this age are descendants of that race.” This quote is culled out from “An Appeal to Every Briton in South Africa on the question of the Indian Franchise” dated December 16, 1895. This appeal was an attempt on the part of Gandhi to place before every Briton in South Africa, an Indian view of the Indian Franchise. The preceding sentences give an idea about the context. “Mr. Maydon made a speech at Bellair and a curious resolution was passed at the meeting. With the greatest deference to the honourable gentleman, I venture to take exception to his statement that the Indians have ever remained in a state of servitude and are, therefore, unfit for self-government. Although he invoked the aid of history in support of his statement, I venture to say that history fails to bear out the statement. In the first place Indian history does not date from the invasion of Alexander the Great. But I take the liberty to say that India of that date will compare very favourably with Europe of today. In support of that statement I beg to refer him to the Greek description of India at pp. 169-70 of Hunter’s Indian Empire, partly quoted in my “Open Letter”. What, however, of India of a period previous to that date?” History says that the Aryans’ home was not India but they came from Central Asia, and one family migrated to India and colonized it, the others to Europe. The government of that day was, so history says, a civilized government in the truest sense of the term. The whole Aryan literature grew up then. The India of Alexander’s time was India on the decline. When other nations were hardly formed, India was at its zenith, and the Indians of this age are descendants of that race. To say, therefore, that the Indians have been ever under servitude is hardly correct.”² From a cursory look at the quote it is clear that he brought in reference to the Aryan bloodline in the course of his argument to refute the contention that Indians have ever remained in a state of servitude. In no way the Aryan bloodline is glorified. On the contrary they are described as colonizers.

The authors also quote from the “Open Letter” which Gandhi wrote in December, 1894 to the Hon. Members of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly. The quote starts with an incomplete sentence of Gandhi, that is, “I venture to point out that both the English and the Indians spring from a common stock, called the Indo-Aryan.” The year is mentioned as 1893 by the authors which is incorrect. Here also the full sentence of the quote is given which makes the context very clear. “In spite of the Premier's opinion to the contrary, as expressed in his speech at the second reading of the Franchise Bill, with the utmost deference to His Honour, I venture to point out that both the English and the Indians spring from a common stock, called the Indo-Aryan.” Gandhi’s reference to Aryan connection was in the context of defending his argument that Britishers cannot claim any superiority as a colonizer. Therefore, his attempt was to put the Indians on the same footing and not out of any disdain for the African blacks. He wanted to remind them that Indians were in no way inferior to Anglo Saxon brethren.

Further, he wrote in the Indian Opinion, on April 22, 1905 about certain restrictions on Indians in East London with regard to walking on foot-paths and residing in the town. The Town Council took legal proceedings against those Indians who disobeyed the racial law. Reflecting on it, Gandhi wrote “The Indians preferred an appeal against the decision on the plea that they were not ‘Asiatics’ but Aryans who had subsequently settled in India. We are constrained to say that our brethren have wasted their money on the litigation, and brought ridicule on themselves to boot.” From this reply it is clear that Gandhi was not in favour of claiming any sort of benefit on racial grounds or Aryan lineage. He advised them to submit quietly to the law and take out the passes. Further, they should continue the struggle in the parliament because they have the power and the right to vote. He was quite sure that it would yield good results if they exercised them judiciously. Thus it is clear that Gandhi neither used the Aryan theory to get undue benefits from Britishers nor was it used as superiority of Brown over the Black.

It is true that in today’s world particularly in Africa the word ‘kaffir’ is taken to be extremely derogatory and highly offensive. But one has to go into the actual context of the then South African situation to fully understand and asses it. It was a term generally used by one and all during those days without any feeling of racial prejudice or with derogatory implications. It can be substantiated by its widespread use in different kinds of literature from literary to sociological writings. The classic work Kaffir folk-lore: A selection from the traditional tales, which is a collection of stories prevalent among the people living on the Eastern border of the cape colony with copious explanatory notes by Geo. Mc Call Theal published way back in 1886 by S. Sonnenschein, Le Bas and Lowrey, London has an introductory chapter regarding the ‘kaffirs’. It gives explanation about the term ‘kaffir’. It is worth quoting to understand the very meaning of the term those days. “In South Africa the word Kaffir is often used in a general way to signify any black native who is not the descendant of an imported slave, but on the eastern frontier of the Cape Colony the term is usually restricted to a member of the Amaxosa tribe.” [xviii] It was used officially without any sort of derogatory connotations during the colonial period until the early twentieth century. Encyclopedia Britannica made frequent use of the term and eleventh edition of it published in 1911 had an article on the title. It describes Kaffirs as follows: “Today it is used to describe that large family of Bantu Negroes inhabiting the greater part of the Cape, the whole of Natal and Zululand, and the Portuguese dominions on the east coast south of the Zambezi. The name is also loosely applied to any negro inhabitant of South Africa.”[xix] Thus it is evident that when Gandhi was using this term he did not mean any ill will to them.

It is an undeniable fact that the Indians had not only suffered at the hands of the Whites of South Africa but also in their dealings with the Blacks purely in physical terms. Even Gandhi had greatly suffered at the hands of some of the African Blacks particularly during his prison days. Here one is reminded of the incident in which Gandhi was thrown out of the lavatory and narrowly escaped with his life and limb. Critics have rightly pointed out that Gandhi had demanded separate lavatories, food and even separate entrance for Indians at Durban Post and Telegraph Office. Natal Indian Congress was also in the forefront of making such demands. What the critics actually forget is the immediate context and real intentions behind these demands. If one takes into account the fact that Indians were being continuously harassed and insulted at the hands of clerks and other authorities in the Post Office, then their demand for separate entrance could be really appreciated. But the critics totally ignore the context of the demands. Similarly the demand for separate lavatory should be viewed in the context of Gandhi’s own experiences in the prison. So far as the demand for separate food in jail is concerned, one could hardly have any objection to such a reasonable demand. Food habits are always governed by physical, regional, cultural and even personal considerations. That is the reason why even inside the country and community different kinds of foods are sought and consumed by different people.

A number of explanations could be offered as to why Gandhi failed to take up cudgels on behalf of African blacks despite his high idealism and concern for the downtrodden and the deprived. The critics missed the vital point that it was quite expedient for Gandhi’s struggle in South Africa to make a clear distinction between the African Blacks and the Indians in South Africa. Indians as the subjects of British Empire had certain inherent rights and underlining them Gandhi was trying to put the Whites of South Africa as well as the British establishment at London on the defensive. That puts his struggle for Indians on a high moral pedestal. It could not have been the case with African Blacks. One can get the clue why Gandhi has not started a joint campaign with Blacks in South Africa from a reply to the question raised by Rev. Tema, a black African freedom fighter from Johannesburg associated with the African National Congress who came to India in 1939 and sought Gandhi’s guidance on the formation of an Indo-African united Non-white Front in South Africa. Gandhi in his reply said: “It will be a mistake….. You will be pooling together not strength but weakness. You will best help one another by each standing on his own legs. The two cases are different. The Indians are a microscopic minority. They can never be a ‘menace’ to the white population. You, on the other hand, are the sons of the soil who are being robbed of your inheritance. You are bound to resist that. Yours is a far bigger issue. It ought not to be mixed up with that of the Indians. This does not preclude the establishment of the friendliest relations between the two races. The Indians can co-operate with you in a number of ways. They can help you by always acting on the square towards you. They may not put themselves in opposition to your legitimate aspirations, or run you down as ‘savages’ while exalting themselves as ‘cultured’ people, in order to secure concessions for themselves at your expense.” It is also worth quoting the answer given by Gandhi on the question “What sort of relations would you favour between these two races? ” In his reply Gandhi said: “The closest possible. But while I have abolished all distinction between an African and an Indian that does not mean that I do not recognize the difference between them. The different races of mankind are like different branches of a tree — once we recognize the common parent stock from which we are sprung, we realize the basic unity of the human family, and there is no room left for enmities and unhealthy competition.”[xx]

According to Nishikant Kolge Gandhi’s concern for the British Indian being classed with South African blacks was not because he considers them as an inferior race. He does so to record his opposition to the classification of British Indians as natives of South Africa in order to impose civil disabilities on them. However, Kolge admits that one cannot ignore the fact that there are a few occasions when Gandhi categorically stated that British Indians are undoubtedly infinitely superior to the Blacks. He analyses the reasons for such statements of Gandhi from a historical perspective. “In the 1890s, South Africa comprised four areas. The two British ones were the Cape Colony, which was self-governing under the crown; and Natal which was a crown colony. The two Boer republics were the Transvaal and the Orange Free State. There was severe racial discrimination in all these places. The whites considered themselves superior. However, it is to be noted that the white government was willing to grant civil rights and exempt the “educated” and “civilised” Asians and blacks of South Africa from racial discrimination. It was in this context that Gandhi tried to project the British Indians as being superior to the South African blacks. Thus Gandhi was not claiming that the British Indians are superior to African blacks, the educated and civilised ones. All that he was claiming was that unlike the African “savages” and “raw kaffirs” British Indians are eligible for certain kind of civil rights which were given to the “educated and civilised” African blacks.”[xxi]

Besides, one has to bear in mind the limitations of Gandhi and his struggles. He was living in an alien country with a limited support base, was a young man, quite a novice and inexperienced in the ways of politics. Another point which critics have hardly taken into consideration is that all his demands arose more from his deep commitment to find solutions for the problems faced by Indians in South Africa and not so much from disdain and contempt for the African Blacks. This also illustrated by the fact that he differentiated between Africans and Indians only when he was putting forward the demands on the behalf of the Indian communities. But in all other occasions he was quite cordial and respectful to African Blacks. The scholars who analysed the general writings of Gandhi from as early as 1894 on native Africans of South Africa came to the conclusion that he was very ‘cordial, respectful and supportive.’[xxii]

After his return from South Africa, even while fighting for the freedom of India, Gandhi was concerned about the problems of Blacks in Africa and America. It is evident from Gandhi’s letter addressed to President Franklin D. Roosevelt on July 1, 1942. He wrote: “I venture to think that the Allied declaration that the Allies are fighting to make the world safe for freedom of the individual and for democracy sounds hollow so long as India and, for that matter, Africa are exploited by Great Britain and America has the Negro problem in her own home. But in order to avoid all complications, in my proposal I have confined myself only to India. If India becomes free, the rest must follow, if it does not happen simultaneously.” [xxiii]Thus his fight in the ultimate analysis was not merely for the freedom of India but also of Africa, and America. At this point one is tempted to quote Gandhi’s own words “I have not conceived my mission to be that of a knight-errant wandering everywhere to deliver people from difficult situations. My humble occupation has been to show people how they can solve their own difficulties.”[xxiv] The subsequent historical developments in general and struggle against racial discrimination both in South Africa and United States of America led by Nelson Mandela and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., go a long way to prove how prophetic were the words of Gandhi. All these people successfully fought their own battles for human dignity taking Gandhi and his idea of Satyagraha as the main source of inspiration for their struggles. This was what Gandhi had meant when he said that if his life and work could inspire people to struggle for solutions to their problems his mission would have been achieved.

Nelson Mandela despite he being a leader of the Blacks greatly appreciated the wider significance and limitations of Gandhi’s stay and struggle in South Africa while comparing his prison experiences with those of Gandhi in South African prison. He said “Gandhi had been initially shocked that Indians were classified with Natives in prison; his prejudices were quite obvious, but he was reacting not to "Natives", but criminalised Natives. He believed that Indians should have been kept separately. However, there was an ambivalence in his attitude for he stated, ‘It was, however, as well that we were classed with the Natives. It was a welcome opportunity to see the treatment meted out to Natives, their conditions (of life in gaol), and their habits.’ All in all, Gandhi must be forgiven those prejudices and judged in the context of the time and the circumstances. We are looking here at the young Gandhi, still to become Mahatma, when he was without any human prejudice, save that in favour of truth and justice. " [xxv]

In the light of the above discussion, one could fairly conclude that accusing Gandhi being a racist and his use of Aryan bloodline theory to seek a favour from the British holds no ground. The arguments provided by his critics are equally biased and devoid of any irrefutable evidence. Whatever actions and the words these critics have picked up from Gandhi’s life and writings, as it has been asserted in our discussion, have been taken out of context and that too in distorted forms .These arguments are also marred by a reductionist approach to superimpose some of the ideas which are presently popular on the life and work of Gandhi living in South Africa during the period 1893-1914. In reality such a reductionist approach can spoil the reputation of even the greatest of the man. The fact remains that the life and work of Gandhi in South Africa turned out to be a beacon light under which a number of eminent persons took them up for emulation in their life.

Notes and References

[i]. See Arundhati Roy’s Introduction, “The Doctor and The Saint” in B. R Ambedkar, Annihilation of the Caste: The Annotated Critical Edition (New Delhi: Navayana, 2014).

[ii]. For details see http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Mahatma-Gandhi-was-a-casteist-Arundhati-Roy-says/articleshow/38580172.cms

See also http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/thiruvananthapuram/Gandhi-Looked-Down-upon-Dalits-Says-Arundhati-Roy/2014/07/18/article2335605.ece

[iii]. Ashwin Desai, Goolam Vahed , The South African Gandhi :Stretcher Bearer of Empire, (New Delhi : Navayana, 2015).

[iv] . https://thewire.in/history/setting-the-record-straight-on-gandhi-and-race A shorter version of this article has appeared in The Telegraph

[v] . https://thewire.in/history/ramachandra-guha-gandhi-south-africa

[vi]. .https://theprint.in/opinion/ramachandra-guha-is-wrong-a-middle-aged-gandhi-was-racist-and-no-mahatma/168222/

[vii]. See Arundhati Roy’s Introduction, “The Doctor and The Saint”op.cit.p.65.

[viii]. Ibid.

[ix]. M. K. Gandhi An Autobiography or the Story of My experiments with Truth (Ahmedabad : Navajivan, 2010), p.141.

[x]. M. K. Gandhi, Report of The Natal Indian Congress, The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandh , (Herein after referred as CWMG)Publications Division Government of India, New Delhi,Vol .1 pp.245-251 (August,1895).

https://www.gandhiheritageportal.org/cwmg_volume_thumbview/MQ==#page/292/mode/2up

[xi]. The Times of Natal, dated October 25, 1894.

[xii]. Refer Gandhi’s Open letter wrote around December 19, 1894 to the Hon. Members of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly, CWMG, Vol .1, pp.183-84.

[xiii]. https://www.academia.edu/1830861/Freedom_Race_and_Francophonie_Gandhi_and_the_Construction_of_Peoplehood

[xiv]. Gandhi in one of his letters addressed to L. W. Ritch dated April 12, 1911 made a reference to Finot’s book. Gandhi asked him to get the same from Henry Polak’s collection to present it to Canon Almett, who was supposed to leave for England shortly.

[xv]. He wrote in Young India in 1924 that “Finot has shown by his scientific researches that there is in them no inherent inferiority as is commonly supposed to be the case. All they need is opportunity. I know that if they have caught the spirit of the Indian movement, their progress must be rapid." Young India, 21-8- 1924.

[xvi]. Gandhi in his Johannesburg Speech, May 18, 1908, CWMG, Vol. 8, p. 246.

[xvii]. Indian Opinion, 26-8-1911.

[xviii]. The net version of the book is available on the site:

http://www.dankalia.com/literature/frc200.htm

[xix]. "Kaffirs". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol.15, 1911. pp. 627–629.An online version is available on the site: https://www.myheritage.com/research/collection-90100/compilation-of-published-sources?itemId=34463674&action=showRecord#fullscreen

[xx]. Harijan, 18-2-1939.

[xxi]. See Nishikant Kolge “Was Gandhi a Racist” Economic & Political Weekly, January 30, 2016, Vol. 51, No. 5,p.91.

[xxii]. Ibid , p.90.

[xxiii]. file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Personal/My%20Documents/Downloads/2074_

GandhiRooseveltLetter%20(1).pdf

[xxiv]. Harijan, 28-6-1942.

[xxv]. Nelson Mandela, Gandhi the Prisoner. http://www.mkgandhi.org/articles/speechnm1.htm

To download the book

https://archive.org/details/sibykjoseph-gandhi-in-south-africa-A-racist-or-a-liberator

Search This Blog

Sevagram Ashram Pratishthan, Wardha

Translate

Total Pageviews

Reading Materials for Short Term Course on Gandhian Thought - Siby K. Joseph

Session -2

GANDHI’S VISION OF ASHRAM
Siby K. Joseph

Gandhi in South Africa: A Racist?

Siby Kollappallil Joseph

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Positive Power Dynamics

Allowance for the upkeep of Gandhi as a State Prisoner in 1930

Workshop sessions on Gandhi and Community Living

Reading Materials for Short Term Course on Gandhian Thought - Siby K. Joseph

Session -2

GANDHI’S VISION OF ASHRAMSiby K. Joseph

Gandhi in South Africa: A Racist?

Siby Kollappallil Joseph

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Positive Power Dynamics

Allowance for the upkeep of Gandhi as a State Prisoner in 1930

Workshop sessions on Gandhi and Community Living

GANDHI’S VISION OF ASHRAM
Siby K. Joseph