Mahatma Gandhi's Philosophy and His Approach to Non-Violence

Mahatma Gandhi was a prominent political and spiritual leader in India who is widely remembered for his advocacy of non-violent civil disobedience as a means of achieving political and social change. His ideology was based on the principles of Satyagraha, which emphasizes truth and non-violence. Despite his contributions, it is essential to critically examine his philosophy and actions. This article will delve into his approach towards Ahimsa, Muslim appeasement, and his stance on British independence.

Ahimsa: The Ethic of Non-Violence

Ahimsa, the principle of non-violence, is a core tenet of Gandhi's philosophy. However, the practice of Ahimsa cannot be absolute; it requires self-defense and the ability to defend oneself if necessary. Gandhi taught Ahimsa to Indians, not to the British. He even pervertedly referred to historical figures like Chhatrapati Shivaji, Guru Govind Singh, and Maharana Pratap as misguided patriots, despite their just causes for self-defense and retaliation.

The value of self-defense without being the first to initiate aggression is a greater good than blind Ahimsa. If only 100% of the population practices Ahimsa at all times, but one person does not, the entire community's safety remains at risk. Thus, Gandhi's version of Ahimsa was not universally applicable, and he sometimes prioritized strategic non-violence over absolute non-harm.

Muslim Appeasement and Hypocrisy

Gandhi's approach to Muslim appeasement is another contentious aspect of his philosophy. Despite his commitment to Ahimsa, his actions during the partition of India reveal a deeply hypocritical stance. For instance:

Support of murderers: Gandhi supported the murderers of Swami Shraddhanand, a prominent Hindu spiritual leader. Hindus asked to die: During the partition, Gandhi asked Hindus to accept death without resistance in the face of mass migration and violence. Violence against women: He asked East Bengali Hindu women to consume poison as a voluntary act, rather than defend themselves against potential harm.

These acts demonstrate a lack of consonance between Gandhi's professed principles and his actions, highlighting the extent of his hypocrisy. Instead of advocating for peaceful resistance, he sanctioned and encouraged violence under the guise of sacrifice and nationalistic ideals.

British Independence and Divisiveness

Gandhi's approach to British independence also raises significant questions about his motivations and methods. The Indian National Congress, the party Gandhi led, was established and funded by the British government since 1885. This was to prevent Indians from openly waging a war against the British. As such, the Congress's movements were always suspect and became tools to maintain British control rather than foster true independence.

Gandhi's entry into the freedom movement was a late one. He enjoyed the benefits of the British government, never faced harsh punishments, and did not grow up with dreams of freeing India like Bhagat Singh, Azad, and Savarkar. Gandhi's goal was to achieve independence as per the terms of the British, not to serve the interests of Indians.

The Quit India Movement, which Gandhi led, was labeled as the Split India Movement by Subhash Chandra Bose (Azad) and even criticized by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Gandhi's willingness to collaborate with Jinnah and the British government behind the scenes during this movement attests to his ambiguous stance towards independence.

Conclusion

Mahatma Gandhi's contributions to India's struggle for freedom and the principles of non-violence will continue to be studied and debated. His philosophy of Ahimsa, his actions during the partition, and his approach to achieving independence highlight critical aspects of his legacy. While his non-violent methods were successful in some respects, his actions and decisions in certain critical moments raise questions about the true nature of his commitment to peace and justice.