In 1991 India
changed. We opened up. We started becoming part of the global economy.
Globalisation had finally engulfed us. Slowly some disturbing signs
started emerging. In 1996 we at SIDH organized a week long
seminar on “Re-thinking the New Economic Order: Gandhi & Beyond”. It was
not a typical seminar in which speakers come, read their papers and often do
not even listen to others. Here the idea was to honestly deliberate in a sellf
reflective manner, explore, contemplate and question – not neccessarily to
provide answers. It was a wonderful experience for all 25 odd participants,
opening new doors of perception. Among others one of the main speakers
was Kishen Patnaik. Kishen jee was a socialist. A politician – but of a rare variety. He was authentic, a
deep and original thinker, not stuck in his views, but ever willing to change
them if he was convinced otherwise. On the third or the fourth day of the
seminar, Kishen jee commenting on Mahatma Gandhi admitted that people like him
(the socialists, the leftists, but I think it applies to most people) did not
understand or rather rubbished Gandhi’s spiritual or religious aspect. They
felt that Gandhi used this as ruse to entice and allure the common Indian. But
now (in 1996) he admitted that perhaps they had made a mistake in understanding
Gandhi and that now he feels that spirituality is as fundamental a need of a
human being as “roti, kapda aur makaan”. This was a major statement coming
from a hard core socialist. All of us who knew Kishen jee were surprised and it
made us think deeply about the meaning of spirituality.
Even though I am not a Gandhian but
Gandhi has helped me understand many things – the question of civilization, the
inherent goodness and wisdom of the ordinary Indian, the beauty of the Ordinary
and the potential strength of Indian civilization and last but not the least
the modern civilization and its systems, etc – and I am indebted to him (as I
am to many others) for this. I also find that in modern times he was perhaps
the only mass leader who spoke about the importance (actually more than that,
he spoke of the dire necessity) of dharma in politics. He was not
secular. He saw the greatness of India - in its civilisational understanding of
existence, its values and in the ways of and in the mindset of the ordinary
peoples of India. He was not a materialist even though he understood the value
of material needs. It is worth reading his speech given in Muir College (now
Allahabad University) in a seminar on “Is Economic Progress the Real Progress”
on December 22, 1916.
The dominant politics in India,
cutting across different political parties and other political movements (e.g.
Narmada Bachao, the JP movement etc.), have by and large, been secular and
focused mainly on materialism - demanding or protesting against something to do
only with material concerns. A few leaders spoke of morality in politics but
they too refrained from speaking about dharma. Morality too mostly got
restricted to honesty in material terms and hardly went beyond that.
The focus of modern politics has
largely been confined to material concerns but a human being is far more than
just the body and its needs. Respect, confidence, trust, are some of the basic
needs of a human being. He has an inherent sense of nyaya (justice), of
fairness even though he may behave and act otherwise. All this is inherent in
the Being of human being. Fear,
inferiority, sense of shame, anger, angst, frustration, etc are the other side
which human nature likes to avoid, dislikes and abhors. This too is part of the
Beingness or the Isness. This is Truth. This is reality for anyone to see and
experience. It is beyond logic. It is self evident.
India is wounded. Naipaul called it “a
wounded civilization”. It has been
inflicted with violence and terror, sense of shame during the Islamic regime
and even more so under the British rule.
The wound is deep and it has been ignored and left to rot manifesting sometimes
in cowardice, hypocrisy, self consciousness, imitation, pettiness, myopia and
sometimes in vulgarity, small time violent, aggressive and abusive behavior,
etc.
Mahatma Gandhi being an extremely
sensitive person and being an introvert understood this malaise first through
his personal experience and then through observation and incisive insight that
he had. Therefore his politics was not confined to political freedom only but
he was trying to address the issue of healing the people of India by giving
them a sense of pride, confidence, respect and trust in their own ways (of
doing and looking/ perceiving). He also understood not only the values embedded
in Indian civilization but the damage (at the level of the mind and psyche)
done by modernity and therefore in “Hind Swaraj” while critiquing Modern
civilization and its systems he also tried to show the beauty inherent in Indian
civilization.
This is not being written to eulogies
Mahatma Gandhi but only to set the context to what needs to be elaborated.
Today in the times of Corona crises the world seems to have slowed down.
Whether the crisis was man-made or was an act of nature, nevertheless it has
shaken people like no other crises perhaps since the Second World War. If it
hasn’t already, it should make the entire world and in particular us, Indians,
to think deeply, introspect and reflect. Perhaps it is a blessing in disguise.
It should be quite obvious that the general direction of “development”,
“progress” and “growth” taken by the countries of the world is not only
unsustainable but violent and discriminating. It is time to boldly review and
make a course correction, even if it requires taking a U- turn.
India has been in deep trouble in more
ways than one. Basic necessities of millions of people are yet to be met,
disparities of all kinds are increasing by leaps and bounds, the villages are
under deep neglect, migration is rampant, the traditional and adivasi life
itself is under severe threat, etc etc. We need not elaborate. We have seen
different political parties – old ones, new ones – doing the same things which
have been done in the past. Following the same path of “development” and
playing the same old “dirty” tricks to remain in power. It is déjà vu every
time. It is high time we came to the
conclusion that the answer does not lie in the kind of system, the paradigm, we
have adopted and we have been trained into believing - would deliver. We need
to look into how the human mind has been indoctrinated by Modernity. This needs
to be understood before we can start thinking in a fundamentally different and right
direction. Patch work solutions will not work. Modern systems have the capacity
to absorb and digest even righteous dissent. It gobbles up (without even a burp)
anything coming from within the same paradigm (even dissent) which many times
is propped up by its own design. It has the capacity to absorb and sometimes
even promote opposition and lend support to both sides like the Democrats and
the Republicans, the Congress (and its various allies including the communists)
and the BJP etc. It can support both the establishment and the anti-establishment
forces at the same time. It has refined the art of management and manipulation
of the human mind to a very high degree through media, research, education, NGOs,
institutions giving awards and organizing lecture tours, the academia and the
intellectuals. It works invisibly, remotely and it is almost omnipresent. The modern
GOD!
We need to wonder at the present day
contradictions: Communists China and its capitalist/imperialistic ways;
Capitalist America and its institutions supporting and nurturing the liberals,
the leftists etc.. These contradictions should wake us up and make us wonder
and be in awe of the power of Modernity and its ways. Only then can we
objectively understand its core. Contemplation on contradictions and paradoxes has
the potential to reveal. We also need to connect seemingly disjointed events
and happenings to see the design.
Modernity stands on falsity,
individualism, comparison and competition. It does not distinguish,
deliberately perhaps, between fact and truth and between perception and truth.
Hence the biggest falsehood it has been successful in propagating - supported
by the lure of individual FREEDOM - is that “there is no (absolute) Truth; that
each one defines their own truth (सब का अपना अपना सच होता है)”. Whereas in actuality, each one has their
own perception (as different from Truth) (सबकी
अपनी अपनी दृष्टि होती है). Truth is
Universal (सच
तो एक है, सबके लिए). In one stroke
it has blurred the sharp and important distinction between Truth and
perception, between truth and information, between knowledge and information. In
fact so much so that now information is perceived to be knowledge. And opinions
are taken as Truth. So freedom becomes individual’s
choice, to be defined by him (as he or she likes). Consequence is morality and
ethics get thrown out of the window; they are a hindrance to individual freedom.
Morality becomes an imposition. Individual freedom is the new value.
Morality and Ethics need to be
grounded in Truth. Truth, ethics and morality go hand in hand. Morality can
only be derived from Universal principles – Truth, the sanatana
(eternal). If we do not accept (forget
understanding) that there is Truth, which is universal, beyond time and space (सनातन), then there cannot be an agreement on the
question of ethics or morality. We need to come to a shared understanding on
universal truth followed by an agreement on morality and ethics.
Modernity talks of objectivity but
confines it only to the material, the manifested world. But the fundamental reality
is of the unmanifested, the unseen, the felt, the experienced, the known and not
of the manifested and sensorial, which is changing all the time. The world of
Meaning and the world of the Word are two different realms, inter-connected but
different. The reality is that the world of Word is dependent and indicative of
the world of Meaning, which is fundamental and which is beyond language, which
IS - whether one understand it (the meaning) or not. Words can be learnt but
meanings have to be understood and ultimately experienced. Modernity tries to
objectify the manifested (which is changing all the time) and subjectify that
which is fundamental, constant and needs to be felt, experienced and
understood, all within. This is topsy-turvy. But modernity ignores this reality
and lays emphasis only on the manifested, the material, the sensorial, the
measurable. This is the modern paradigm. This breeds comparison, competition,
and individualism pushing everyone into running the same race – globalization,
uniformity and homogenization – different names in different contexts but all
emanating from the same source. Both freedom and equality the two great values
of modern times are perceived in the manifested world without bothering about
developing any understanding of their true meaning. In reality, in Truth both
freedom and equality belong to the paradigm of meaning and not to the paradigm
of word.
Most political movements base their
ideas on alleviating the plight of the common man. They do not take into
account either the wound of the common man or the inherent faith and values of
the common man. If at all it is taken into consideration, it is only to
exploit. The common man of this country despite the corruption and
indoctrination through modern education and media, still believes in ethics,
believes in morality believes in the sanatana. The common man is caught
in between – the rat race to/for “development” (the race which the modern
paradigm ensures every one must run) and the sanskaras of ethics, values
and sanatana. The common man is caught in between and somehow hanging on
to the values while trying hard to run the race.
All political movements (with the exception of
the efforts made by Mahatma Gandhi but hardly understood by his followers) have
been grounded in the modern paradigm. They have been led by people who hardly
had any issues with the modern paradigm. They were themselves caught in
individualism and were caught in the images of their own personal identity
(either/or create consciously by them or got created by others). I am not
trying to deride or demean the entire political class. Some of them were great and
worth admiring. But the point is about the general trend which politics has
been taking. Except Mahatma Gandhi most political leaders were certainly
impacted by modern education and did come under its influence to a smaller of
lager degree. In this context it is worth reading the speech given by the
Mahatma on March 17, 1918 at Sabarmati Ashram on the day he decides to sit on
fast unto death in support of the demands of the Mill workers of Ahmedabad.
The present paradigm is solely a
materialistic paradigm which promotes individualism (in alignment with the idea
of personal freedom). And individualism breeds violence. It encourages comparison
and jealousy. But the idea of individual freedom (never defined hence it
translates into ‘do what you please’) is alluring to the political class. They
never understood the deep synergy between the exploitative results of the paradigm
they were trying to challenge and the idea of individual freedom, individual
Right, comparison, competition, the market economy and modern State - each
supporting the other.
The modern state abhors society (samaaj
is a better word, nonetheless) as the samaaj is comparatively speaking
more self reliant (and not just in material terms), believes in more or less
the same values and code of conduct and hence has the strength to pose a
challenge to the State. Samaaj also discourages vulgar or excessive
consumption and display of wealth. Therefore it is in the interest of both the
State and the market (economy) to disintegrate the samaaj and promote
individualism. Modern education and
media are the two most effective instruments in this game.
Colonial education had been successful
in building a false narrative around our traditions and therefore spirituality,
religion, ethics and morality all were clubbed together and thrown out of the
window as useless, retrograde, and seeped in ignorance and superstition etc.
Secularism was fashionable, alluring and modern. But it has no basis (in Truth). The blurring
of the distinction between fact and Truth helped the spread of secularism.
So a new political movement will have to be
grounded in Truth (the sanatana), followed by ethics and morality. It
will have to develop a clear understanding of swa-tantr-ta (in alignment
with Truth, the existential reality) and swa-raj as different from
modern concept of freedom and independence. It will have to have a very clear
understanding of the distinction between Needs and Wants, between the
fundamental and the manifested (the meaning and the word; the Being and the
Doing or appearing etc.). To summarise the new politics will have to be grounded
in hard core spirituality, Truth (eternal, sanaatan).
April 19, 2020
Mussoorie
Pawan Kumar Gupta
pawansidh.blogspot.com