After March 14, 1915
BHAISHRI M.,
You are right in what you think about non-violence. Its essentials
are daya1, akrodha3, aman4, etc. Satyagraha is based on non-violence.
We saw this clearly in Calcutta and came to the conclusion that we
should include it among our vows. The thought led to the further conclusion
that we must observe all the yamas5 and that, if we do so by way of
vows, we perceive the inner significance of non-violence. In my talks
with hundreds of men here I place the various yamas above everything
else.
सियाराम
प्रेमपीयूषपूरन
होत जनमु न भरतको
|
मुनिमनअगम
यमनियमसमदम
विषमव्रत आचरतको
||6
I remembered this verse in Calcutta on this occasion and pondered
deeply over it. I am absolutely clear in my mind that India's
deliverance and ours will be achieved through the observance of
these vows.
In observing the vow of non-hoarding, the main thing to be borne in
mind is not to store up anything which we do not require. For
agriculture, we may keep bullocks, if we use them, and the equipment
required for them. Where there is a recurring danger of famine, we
shall no doubt store food grains. But we shall always ask ourselves
whether bullocks and food grains are in fact needed. We are to
observe all the yamas in thought as well, so that we shall
grow more secure in them from day to day and come to think of fresh
things to renounce. Renunciation has no limit to it. The more we
renounce, the more shall we grow in the knowledge of the atman7.
If the mind continues to move towards renunciation of the desire for
hoarding and if in practice we give up hoarding as far as it is
physically possible to do, we shall have kept the vow of
non-hoarding.
The same is true about non-stealing. Non-hoarding refers to stocking
of things not needed. Non-stealing refers to the use of such things.
If I need only one shirt to cover myself with but use two, I am
guilty of stealing one from another. For, a shirt which could have
been of use to someone else does not belong to me. If five bananas
are enough to keep me going, my eating a sixth one is a form of
theft. Suppose we have a stock of 50 limes, thinking that among us
all we would need them. I need only two, but take three because
there are so many. This is theft.
Such unnecessary consumption is also a violation of the vow of
non-violence. If, with the ideal of non-stealing in view, we reduce
our consumption of things we would grow more generous. If we do so,
actuated by the ideal of non-violence, we would grow more
compassionate. In assuring, as it were, every animal or living thing
that it need have no fear on our account, we entertain
compassion—love—for it. A man who entertains such love will not find
any living being inimical to him, not even in thought. That is the
most emphatic conclusion of the Shastras and my experience as well.
The principle underlying all these vows is truth. By deceiving
oneself, one may refuse to recognize an act of stealing or hoarding
as such. Hence, by taking careful thought we can ensure at every
step that truth prevails. Whenever we are in doubt whether a
particular thing should be stored or not, the simple rule is not to
store it. There is no violation of truth in renunciation. When in
doubt about the wisdom of speaking, it is the duty of a man who has
taken the vow of truth not to speak.
I want all of you to take only such vows as each one feels inclined
to, of his own free will. I always feel that vows are necessary. But
everyone may take them only when he himself feels the need and take
only such as he wants to. Ramachandra may have been a man of great
prowess, performed innumerable feats and killed hundreds of thousands
of monsters, but no one would think of him today if he had not had
such devoted men as Lakshmana and Bharata to follow him. The point
is, if Ramchandra had had no more than extraordinary strength as a
fighter, his greatness would have been forgotten after a while. There
have been many brave warriors who killed monsters as he did. There
has been none among them whose fame and greatness are sung in every
home. Ramchandra possessed power of some other kind which he could
induce into Lakshmana and Bharata and in virtue of which the latter
became great men of austerities. Singing in praise of their austerities,
Tulsidasji asked, who else, if Bharata had not been born and practised
austerities unattainable even by great sages, would have turned an
ignorant man like him to Rama? This is as much as to say that Lakshmana
and Bharata were the guardians of Rama's fame, that is, of his teaching.
Moreover, austerities are not everything. For, if Lakshmana went without
food or sleep for 14 years, so did Indrajit.8 But the latter
did not know the true significance of austerities which Lakshmana
had learnt from Rama; on the contrary, he possessed a nature which
inclined him to misuse the power earned through austerities and so
came to be known merely as a monster and suffered defeat at the hands
of Lakshmana, the man of self-mastery, a lover of God and seeker of
deliverance. In the same way, however great the ideal of Gurudev,9
if there is no one to implement that ideal, it will remain hidden
in the profound darkness of the ages. Conversely, if there are any
to put it into practice, it will spread its light multiplied many
times over. The steps which one has to climb in order to practise
an ideal constitute tapas.10 One should realize,
therefore, how very necessary it is to bring tapas— discipline—into
the life of children.
Blessings from,
BAPU
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. XIII, pp. 37-39