ISSN 0022-3433 Journal of Peace Research No. 2, Vol. XVIII, 1981
A Gandhian Perspective on Peace
ANIMA BOSE
Ministry of Education, New Delhi
In Gandhi's theory of peace, human values take great prominence. Nonviolence (ahimsa)
is a way of life rather than a tactic, and, together with the search for truth (satyagraha),
makes the difference between passive submission to injustice, and an active struggle against
it. This struggle excludes both physical violence and casting the opponent in the role of
enemy, and hence presupposes compassion and self-criticism. The notion of welfare to all
(sarvodaya) also sees peace as incompatible with exploitation or inequality of wealth.
Peace is not seen as an end state, but as a continuous revolutionary process, where ends
cannot be separated from means.
Inasmuch as Gandhi himself did not formulate his philosophy of peace, or peace-making, through a systematic presentation of
non-violence as a set of principles, he remains somewhat inaccessible to many, especially those who in our time and day look
upon him as an outstanding sociologist with
a deep understanding of the social dynamics
of his contemporary society in India: Gandhi
was an activist and a practical philosopher.
He was not given to abstract theories. He
was a contemplative man of action, and had
the uncommon habit of thinking in public,
taking the people, even his opponents, into
confidence in regard to his actions, and
even motivation. Often his philosophical
formulations were inspired by, and directed
towards, the solution of immediate problems
that beset the country, the society, and the
people of his time and age, as were his
views in response to those who sought his
advice, which occurred more often than not.
But more than his spoken and written words,
the testament of his life reveals fully and
comprehensively all that he stood for. His
avowal, 'My life is my message', was not a
mere statement. So, in seeking a perspective
on Gandhi's principles of peace-making and
non-violence, one must turn to his life,
understand what he stood for, and on what
values and principles he based his actions,
for he was no academic theorist.
The key to an understanding of the
Gandhian perspective on peace, and his
principles, is to comprehend in depth his
revolutionary mode of action which he called satyagraha, and his challenging goal of
sarvodaya, meaning the welfare and good of
all, a fuller and richer concept of people's
democracy than any we have yet known. The
central figure in all this is the individual,
vyakti (in Sanskrit), the human being of
spirit (soul), mind, and body - the three
dimensional being who is never static, whose
'being' is intrinsically linked with his/her
'becoming'. Therefore, individual (vyakti) is
the one supreme consideration, with his/her
conscience and will, together with his/her
reason to affect change. This is not a metaphysical formulation claiming universal
validity, but a pragmatic concept that was
found valid as a principle then, in India of
his time, and has become the basic principle
of the actions and formulae of many thinkers, doers, and social reformers in this
century, globally. If society is made of
human beings, then the human being must
necessarily remain the one supreme consideration.
In an age of conflict within a given nation,
and in the international world (both in
Gandhi's time, and ours), Gandhi believes
that the individual must rediscover the right
mind - because there are values without
which he/she cannot live in society. Therefore, Gandhi worked for the rediscovery of
that right mind which would reach out to
unity, love, peace, emphasizing that for ever
there are, and will be, certain eternal values
ethical, spiritual, universal, which human
160
Anima Bose
beings have needed everywhere,which they
acquiredin the past because,as I said earlier,
these are values without which no nember
of the humansociety can live in any 'human
society',but which are now (and in Gandhi's
own time) in large measure lost to us because of our carelessness and insensitivity
toward them. Consequently,we human beings are now, in a way, unequippedto face
life in a fully human manner, and are
inevitably heading towards destroying our
own selves. BharataKumarappa
underscored
this aspectof Gandhianperspectivewhen he
said,'While pacifismhopes to get rid of war
chiefly by refusingto fight and by carrying
on a propagandaagainstwar, Gandhijigoes
much deeper and sees that war cannot be
avoided as long as the seeds of it remainin
man's breast and grow and develop in his
social, political,and economiclife. Gandhiji's
cure is, therefore, very radical and farreaching.It demandsnothingless than rooting out violencefrom oneself and from one's
environment.'
The rightmind Gandhienvisionedis nonexclusive; it is inclusive. It is not a mind
of intolerance, of accusation, of division.
Rather, it is a mind of unity, a mind that
understands,a mind that has infinite love
workingfor harmony,for peace which is a
way of life, not just a cessationof war, or a
recess between wars and violence. It is a
spirit that heals division, that positively
works for harmony within and without.
Gandhi knew the reality of hatred and intolerancebecause he had experiencedthem
in his own life in South Africa; in British
dominatedIndia; in the cast-riddensociety
of India of his time, Indeed, he became a
fatal victim of the reality and ugliness of
intoleranceand hatred when he was assassinated on January30, 1948, in Delhi. He
was convincedthat no peace could be built
upon exclusivism, upon absolutism with a
mind either in a vacuum, or filled with
wrong values which must be the result if
individualsmade no effortsto rediscoverthe
'rightmind'.
Peace cannot be built on theories,slogans
or piousprogrammes.Therecan be no peace
on earth without the kind of interchange
that restores human mind to the fact that
all life is one, emanatingfrom universalself:
'What though we have many bodies? We
have but one soul. The rays of the sun are
many throughrefraction.But they have the
same source.'2The fact of interdependence
betweenpeoples, betweennatureand human
society, between co-existence and survival,
is accepted in today's world as an imperative,in an age when scientificadvancement,
modern inventions, and technological progressare bywords.
All forms of necessity can contributeto
human freedom - material and economic
need, intellectual need and spiritual need.
Gandhi believed that the greatestof human
needs is the need to be released from evil
and untruththat are in one's own self, and
in society.One importantquestionin today's
world is the crisis of sanity that exists in a
fragmentedsociety, in fragmentednational
structures,in schizoid militaryand business
complexes; 'We are at war with ourselves
and, therefore,at war with one another.'3
The all-encompassingquestion of today,
'can man rediscoverhimself?',is a very urgent one. And it concernseverybody.Gandhi
said again and again that without reference
to moral and spiritual values no recovery
can occur. The evils cannotbe eliminatedby
violence when one group of human beings
flies at another in a destructivefury. Our
evils are common, and their solution has to
be common. And we are unable to undertake this common task because we are not
'ourselves'. Individual freedom, and the
preservation of individual integrity, rated
very high in Gandhi'svalues- but 'Individual in society, not individualper se' stands
out in Gandhianthought. If this individual
in society becomes value-less, the society
would be adverselyaffected: 'One may live
in a cave in certain circumstances,but the
commonman can be testedonly in society.'4
The fabric of society is made up of constantly changing relationships;it is never
finished. It is a continuousprocess of 'be-
A Gandhian Perspective on Peace
coming'.Gandhibelieved that ahimsa (nonviolence) takes account of this dynamicand
non-final state of relationshipsamong human beings and seeks to heal, to bring
together, because it springs from an inner
realizationof the sense of unity, a 'oneness'.
Thus, as Morton Deutsch perceived, 'for
Gandhithere could be no victory or defeat;
there could only be a pursuit of certain
values.'5KennethBouldingconcedes,'... the
road to life, to governmentand to organization alwaysleads uphill.The easy roads, the
intrinsic dynamics always lead downhill to
ultimate destruction. Where then are the
new ideas and the new images of the future
that look like upwardpaths?One is, clearly,
the idea of nonviolent resistanceassociated
with the nameof Gandhi...'
Gandhi thus developed a means to create
possibilities,to conquer violence and to involve one's self, voluntarily,in acts of ethical
existence within the context of relationships
transformingthem toward a new, restructured and reintegratedpattern. He called
this technique,or the way of life, satyagraha:
Gandhi emphasizedthat 'the active state of
ahimsa requires you to resist the wrongdoer.'7 It is a matter of principle, not an
expediency. By identifying ahimsa with
positive love, Gandhi underscorescreativity
and reconstructionas essentialin satyagraha;
inter-personalrelationshipas importantand urgent. It is not just a slogan that 'all
men are brothers'.It is a universallysound
basis for understandingsufferingand for the
recognition of the fact that human beings
have the capacityto change.
Gandhidid not considernonviolenceas a
matter of tactic, although it certainly was
effectivein liberatingIndia'speople from an
alien rule; as it enhanced the black movement in the USA, under Martin Luther
King, Jr., in the 1960s, or as it became
the basis of the liberation of the underprivileged movement under the leadership
of Danilo Dolci in Italy in more recent
years. On the contrary,Gandhibelieved, as
a result of the experimentshe carriedon in
his personal life, and historicallyin India,
161
that nonviolence is as much a means of
achieving 'oneness with the other' as the
fruit of the inner unity already achieved.
Violence is wordless, and arises out of a
bankruptcyof love and compassion. It begins wherethinkingand rationalcommunication have broken down, inhibitingall desire
to communicatewith the 'other'in any other
way than through destructiveand negative
means. Gandhi's concept of non-violence
was neither a sentimentalreligiosity,nor a
denial of the realityof evil. The first duty of
a real satyagrahiis to bring to light the evil,
the wrong, the injustice that she/he knows
of, or sees, even if she/he has to sufferby so
doing. But nonviolence must always be the
means, because, ultimately,truth is the end,
and because love is 'the law of our being'.
'If love, or nonviolence be not the law of
our being, the whole of my argumentfalls to
pieces.'8
Love, or nonviolence, triumphs not by
eliminatingevil at once and once for all, but
resistingand overcomingit anew, every day.
Nonviolence takes account of the reversibility of evil, of change in relationships;what
is more, it seeks to change relationshipsthat
are evil into 'others' that are good, or at
least, less bad. Nonviolence thus implies a
certainkind of courage quite differentfrom
the loudness that is seen in violence. It recognizes 'the need of forgiving... dismissing... releasingmen from what they have
done. Only through this constant mutual
release can men remain free agents.'9This
integrative mode of approach does not
dependupon an ideal view of mankind.This
belief of Gandhi is based neither on the
social context of India, nor on particular
features of the Indian society. It is based
upon the knowledgeof the deeper, the uniquely basic needs common to every human
being. Gandhi repeatedly warned of the
dangersinvolved in focussingupon the misdeeds of the opponent. He observed: 'No
one is wicked by nature ... and if others
are wicked, are we less so?,lO and again,
'WheneverI see an erring man, I say to
myself, I have also erred.'11 Thus non-
162
Anima Bose
violence extends the area of rationality.It
generates a high level of responsibilitytoward the 'other'who is not an 'enemy',but
who could become an 'opponent', the one
who 'disagrees'.The act, and the reaction,
are not automaticbut conscious.
In understandingthe Gandhianperspective
on peace, it is importantto understandthat
in the satyagrahamode of action, 'self-suffering' is the chosen substitutefor violence
to others.To punishand destroythe oppressor is to initiate a cycle of violence and
hatred. The only real liberation is that
which liberatesboth the oppressorand the
oppressed.For self-suffering,inner strength
is an imperativewhich can bear the burden.
It is moral bankruptcyif one is able to remain unmovedby imaginingthe guilt, or the
evil, as exclusively one's adversary. Selfsuffering, Gandhi held, enables life and
morally enriches the world. There is an
engagingparadoxin this that one can overcome evil by sufferingit. The only way truly
to overcomethe adversaryis to help him/her
become other than an enemy. In the Gandhian perspective of peace, one finds this
depthof wisdom.
A true satyagrahirefrainsfrom using violent means not because he/she is unable,
but because she/he chooses to invite sufferingupon herself/himself,if sufferingmust
be the price. 'He who harboursviolence and
hatredin his heart and would kill his enemy
if he could, withoutbeing hurt himself, is a
stranger to nonviolence.'"2Submissioncan
never be any part of self-suffering,nor does
it seek to elevateindividualego.
In the Gandhian concept of peace, the
relationshipbetween ends and means is utterly important. Ends alone can never
justify the means. Gandhi'sfirm conviction
was that meansare as importantas, andoften
even more importantthan, ends. The inseparablecombinationof truthand nonviolence
in Gandhianprinciplesformsthe basis of the
Gandhiansolutionto the problemof means.
He was convinced,as he experimentedwith
truthwhich is the story of his life in essence,
that truthand nonviolenceare so interwined
that it is almostimpossibleto say whereone
beginsand the otherends:'They are like two
sides of a coin, or rather of a smooth, unstampedmetallicdisc.'"3No actionis worthy
of human effort if it degradesman, even if
the outcome is a spectacularsuccess. Nowhereis the problemof means and end more
challengingthan in the considerationof the
conduct, or resolution, of conflict. The
Gandhian experiments throughouthis life
and work in South Africa, in India, and in
Englandsuggestedto him irrevocablythat if
a humanbeing is to free himself or herself,
from fear and threat alike, he/she must set
himself/herselfto the task of conquest of
violence by means that must conformto the
test of truth (satya) and nonviolence
(ahimsa).Means not conformingto the test
of truth and nonviolence corrupta person,
and no good can come out of it even if the
end is declaredlynoble, such as defending
one's country, religion, or freedom. In
today's world, a separation of ends and
means is taken for granted.Success, in the
materialsense,has becomethetouch-stoneof
ends eclipsingmeans-consideration
andoverconcern
ends.
The corthe
for
emphasizing
nerstoneof the Gandhianbasis of ends and
means stands upon the utternecessityof reconciling ends and means consciously
througha philosophyof actiondeeplyrooted
in truth(satyagraha)that is able to face the
penetratingtest of the highestethicalvalues.
I said earlier that to understand the
Gandhianperspectiveon peace, one has to
comprehendhis challenginggoal of 'sarvodaya', the welfare of all, in depth, This 'all'
includes, without any distinction,high and
low, rich and poor, strong and weak, even
the good and the bad. Sarvodayawas not
only Gandhi'sprimaryobjective, it became
a part of his principles necessary for the
achievementof peace and maintainingharmony. Sarvodaya calls for self-giving in
socially beneficial labour. It reaffirms the
concept of trusteeship,and the imperative
of service for all. It is also a means for
workingfor economic equalityand abolishing room for conflict.Gandhisaid: 'I adhere
A Gandhian Perspective on Peace
to my doctrineof trusteeshipin spite of the
ridicule that has been poured upon it. It is
true that it is difficult to reach. So is nonviolencedifficultto attain.'l4
Recognition of sarvodaya and the concept of trusteeship have the corollary of
ruling out exploitation of any kind, and
inequalityof wealth. Gandhi saw in sarvodaya economic equity in society, reaching
down to the last and the least without ruthless compulsionand violence. The supreme
test would be the materialand moral growth
of a human being, balanced one with the
other.Gandhidid not acceptthatthe greatest
good of the greatest number was a valid
proposition, or that the ultimate good of
mankind lay in the endless procession of
more and more materialgoods and in their
acquisition without reference to moral
values. Gandhibelieved that 'the real question ultimately, here and elsewhere, is the
quality of human beings . .. an investment in
Man','5as JawaharlalNehru said at a press
conference.That is preciselywhat sarvodaya
calls for and strives after. Gandhi offered a
practicalway to a social revolution,radical
but through peaceful means which guaranteed improvementin the quality of life,
makingpossible an unprecedentedoutput of
free, collective initiative and endeavour as
withnessed in the Bhoodan (Land-gift)
Movement in Mangrothvillage in India in
1952.
What was Gandhi's future is now our
present.Yet our worktoday is fundamentally
faced with the same problem of achieving
communityas it was in Gandhi'stime. This
is still an age of conflicts;conflict withinthe
nation, conflict between nations, between
peoples. Within nations there are still problems of castes and economic class-distinctions, of the haves and the have-nots,of the
rights of religious and racial minorities.In
some countries,as in South Africa, it is not
the minoritybut the majorityrightsthat are
at stake.In the internationalarena,there are
still the problemsof colonialism of the old
and the new varieties, of countries made
divided and kept divided. This half of the
163
twentieth century has taken on dimensions
as far as violence is concernedthat threaten
annihilation.There are more violentweapons
today than there were in Gandhi's time. If
operated,these have the potency of destroying mankind overnight. The ancient, time
honoured solution of problems through
violence and war seems to be a spent-out
device. War and violence have emergedas a
totally destructiveforce with no record of
rigthingwrongs,and establishingjustice and
equity, although such justificationsmay be
flaunted. Rather, it is now an indisputable
fact that war and violence, nationally and
internationally,create more problems than
they even begin to solve. Yet we continueto
rely on them to solve conflicts, I think, because of our preconceivednotions and utter
reluctance toward adopting nonviolence as
the means.
It is true that the complexities of the
modernworld, progressin the techniqueof
human organization, and the intensifying
pressure created by the human mind must
bring conflicts on differentlevels of human
experience. But destructive wars and uncontrolled violence need not be the normal
conditionsof humancircumstance.
An understandingof the Gandhian perspectives on peace, Gandhianphilosophyof
satyagraha,of truth,nonviolenceand morality in ends-means relationships will bring
into focus how these factors have been allowed to go by default because there is a
cruel contradictionin the situationof human
beings (of spirit, mind, and body) living in
an amoralsocial,economicandinter-national
world. It would be wise to consider and
reflect upon the contemporary situation
within the framework of comparison and
contrast with the Gandhian experiments
which actually took place in India in our
time and yielded fruitfulresults.It would be
unwise to state that those fruitful results
under Gandhi's leadership occurred in
India because the principles,strategies,and
the methodssuited the particularfeaturesin
Indian society. As Milovan Djilas said in
1969, writing on Gandhianteaching in his
164
Anima Bose
book The Unrperfect Society,
'They are a
proof of the intuitive truth that our age has
lost, fallen entirely under the curse of
demagogues and still greater despots .. .' The
Gandhian experiments and the resultant
perspective underscore that mere flight from
violence will not suffice. It is not enough to
condone violence and advocate peace. The
task of the conquest of violence with moral
means is an imperative of our time. But as
Gandhi warned, 'Peace is unattainable by
part performance of conditions, even as a
chemical combination is impossible without
complete fulfilment of the conditions of attainment thereof.'16 Not to believe in the
attainment of peace and conflict resolution
by nonviolence is to underestimate the potentiality of human mind and human spirit
everywhere.
NOTES
1. Kumarappa(1949).
2. Bose (1957, p. 25).
3. Coomarswamy (1947, p. 67).
4. Chander (1945, p. 494).
5. Horowitz (1963, pp. 46-49).
6. Boulding (1962, pp. 33-36).
7. Young India, January 19, 1921.
8. Gandhi, Principles ..., p. 121.
9. Arendt(1958, p. 240).
10. Tendulkar (1938, p. 328).
11. Young India, June 7, 1920.
12. Harijan, July 20, 1933.
13. Gandhi, From Yarvada Mandir ..., p. 19.
14. Bose (1957, p. 66).
15. Jawaharlal Nehru, at a press conference in
New Delhi, June 5, 1958.
16. Prabhu & Rao (1945, p. 59).
REFERENCES
Arendt, Hanna, 1958, The Human Condition.
Chicago.
Bose, N. K., 1957. Selections from Gandhi. Ahmedabad.
Boulding, Kenneth E., 1962. Conflict and Defense.
New York: Harper.
Chander, J. C. (ed.), 1945. Teachings of Mahatma
Gandi. Lahore.
Coomarswamy, 1947. Am I My Brother's Keeper?
New York.
Djilas, Milovan, 1969. The Unperfect Society.
Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand. From Yarvada
Mandir; Ashram Observances.
Gandhi, Mohandas Karamchand. Principles of
Nonviolence.
Horowitz, Irving Louis, 1963. Games, Strategies
and Peace, American Friends Service Committee.
Kumarappa, B., 1949. 'Editor's Note', in M. K.
Gandhi: For Pacifists. Ahmedabad.
Prabhu, R. K. and U. R. Rao (eds.), 1945. The
Mind of Mahatma Gandhi. London.
Tendulkar,D. G., 1938. Mahatma,Vol.V. Bombay.