I have always been fascinated by the idea that the dead might see and hear what the mortals do and say. But, I really hope, for the sake of the dead, that my fascination is untrue. Otherwise, the pain caused by the distortion of his views and experiments would be more heart-rending to Gandhiji than the three bullets which pierced it. I believe that his statement, in the introduction to his autobiography, that the experiments narrated in it should be regarded as illustrations, in the light of which everyone may carry on his own experiments according to his own capacity, has undoubtedly been extended to absurd extremities. Time and again, in the garb of re-inventing Gandhiji and his principles, ‘we, the people of India,' whom he called his ‘soul children,' have been bending them to suit our vested interests. The latest example is the misuse of the concept of ‘Gandhian fast.'
In its traditional sense, fasting would imply afflicting the soul through continual and voluntary crucifixion of the flesh to harmonise the inner and outer spheres of an individual and draw him closer to God. Ideally, the logical outcome should be control of impulses, passion and temper. For Gandhiji, fasting was never devoid of this spiritual significance. But, most importantly, for him it was a way of doing both penance and ‘tapas.' Gandhiji fasted for doing penance as a way of atonement of personal faults as well as the misdeeds of others. Dilution of the line of demarcation between the self and the other was possible through ‘tapas,' which helped in diminishing the egotist sense of the self and also in its enlargement to incorporate the entire mankind. Making penance and ‘tapas' the core essence of fasting was indispensible for Gandhiji because he felt that it was the only way through which one could feel and experience the agony, pain, hunger and oppression of others and strive to inculcate the virtues of compassion, generosity, fraternity and solidarity in our less fortunate brethren.
Experimenting with Gandhiji's experiments and reinventing his principles should be premised on the immutability of the rationale behind his fast. He undertook fast for public causes and never with an intention to turn it into a political weapon. He used fast neither to destabilise the British government nor challenge its policies, despite the fact that he was up against the non-democratic government, which left no stone unturned to divide and rule. The only exception was Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald's communal award, against which Gandhiji sat on a ‘fast unto death' in 1932. But, even in this case, the propelling force was not political but spiritual and moral. It was Gandhiji's belief that each and every man is created equal by God and to discriminate and debase a particular section of mankind on occupational basis is one of the greatest sins. Whether it was his 21-day fast when communal riots started in India's northwest frontier in 1924, 21-day fast in 1933, as an attempt to persuade orthodox Hindus to wipe out ‘untouchability' and to help the ‘Harijan' movement or his fasts in Calcutta and Delhi after the Noakhali riots in 1946, the protest always targeted the misdemeanours of his own people and was aimed at the purification of their thoughts and actions by appealing to their moral and ethical sense. All his political battles were fought on a different ground. He never threatened the British to leave India or else…he will die fasting! In none of his national political movements, be it the Non-Cooperation Movement, the Civil Disobedience Movement or the Quit India Movement, he ever resorted to fasting.
In the light of this understanding of the concept of ‘fasting,' the contemporary political versions seem nothing more than hollow imitations. It is unfortunate that a yoga guru's (who also has assets worth thousands of crores) histrionics, cross-dressing and retaliation against arrest during his stint of fast are likened to the self-flagellation of a man who taught the world about minimising wants and the importance of “a need-based, as against, greed-based life,” as it was inconceivable for him to accept a lifestyle higher than the lowest in the land. For Gandhiji, fast was the last weapon of a ‘Satyagrahi', the last duty which was open to him to be performed. He categorically mentioned in Harijan (18-2-33) that fasts must not be exploited in anticipation. They come in obedience to the call of Truth and not at one's whims and fancies to please the world. The self-appointed crusaders against corruption blatantly ignore this reasoning. How can someone basking in the glory of arrogance, self-righteousness and blackmail ever be related to the greatness of the man who throughout his life endorsed the view, “I disapprove of what you say but I will defend till death your right to say it” and kept emphasising that ‘means' are as important as is the ‘end.' When Chief Ministers sit on goodwill fasts on the occasion of their birthdays, spending crores to add grandiose to the spectacle, they must be reminded of the man for whom fasting and its inherent values are a way of life and not a gimmick.
I am all in for contemporising ‘isms' but not at the cost of burlesquing their foundational ethics.
(The writer is former national general secretary, NSUI and her email ID is ragini_nayak@yahoo.co.in)
