“This civilization is unquestionably the best, but it is to be observed that all civilizations have been on their trial. That civilization which is permanent outlives it. Because the sons of India were found wanting, its civilization has been placed in jeopardy. But its strength is to be seen in its ability to survive the shock.”
– Mahatma Gandhi, ‘How Can India Become free?’, Hind Swaraj
– Mahatma Gandhi, ‘How Can India Become free?’, Hind Swaraj
We just celebrated the 102nd birth anniversary of Pt Deendayal Upadhyaya, the articulate exponent of the truly Bharatiya philosophy of Integral Humanism. The 150th birth anniversary celebrations of Mahatma Gandhi, who proposed the idea of Hind Swaraj, has also begun this week. While discussing about these two stalwarts and their contribution, we tend to take a partisan view, without understanding the philosophical foundation of their thinking and contemporary relevance of the same. If we carefully analyse the fundamental thought processes of both, though in different times, the unanimity of purpose and principles is striking.
Gandhiji in his seminal work Hind Swaraj, tries to explain the true meaning of ‘swaraj’ and explores the root cause of Colonialism. While identifying the key objectives of his proposition on ‘integral humanism’, Deendayalji not just mentions Gandhiji but also clarifies, “Gandhiji himself had set out his idea of independent Bharat in his book Hind Swaraj. So his inquiry into ‘what would be the face of the new Bharat after Independence; in which direction were we to advance’ is not very different from Gandhiji’s efforts to explain the real ‘Swaraj’. In fact, Deendayalji builds on the principles laid down by Gandhiji in the changing times.
Both, Gandhiji and Deendayalji, provide a detailed critique of the Western Civilisation and the colonial idea of modernity. When Gandhiji says, “ It is not due to any peculiar fault of the English people, but the condition is due to modern civilization. It is a civilization only in name. Under it the nations of Europe are becoming degraded and ruined day by day,” he is in fact providing the basis for Deendayalji’s articulation, ‘Both these systems, capitalist as well as communist, have failed to take account of the Integral Man, his true and complete personality and his aspirations’. Negligence of the Self and a blind acceptance of the ‘foreign’ to understand the Bharatiya concerns is the root cause of all problems, is the common diagnosis of the both leaders.
Both reject the centrality of the State in human life and consider ‘moral conduct’ or Dharma as the basis of the Bharatiya civilisation. Crossing the pitfalls created by the so-called Orientalists who distorted the Dharmic traditions, Gandhiji presented our civilisational ethos as the thought leader, and Deendayalji further built on it. While Gandhiji says, “It is my deliberate opinion that India is being ground down, not under the English heel, but under that of modern civilization. It is groaning under the monster’s terrible weight. Religion is dear to me and my first complaint is that India is becoming irreligious.” Deendayalji argues, “When the state-acquires all powers, both political and economic, the result is a decline of Dharma. In this way if the state has unlimited powers, the whole society looks towards the state, for everything. Officers of the government neglect their duties. These are all signs of the preponderance of the powers of state”. Awakening of the societal and individual Dharma is the solution to many ills, for Gandhiji it was a ‘soul’ for Deendayalji it was a Chiti.
Both the leaders went beyond the existing extremist binaries of their times. Gandhiji rejected the division of Moderates and Extremists without claiming to provide a new ideology. Deendayalji negated the binary of Left and Right and provided the scope for an integral and spiritual approach to understand the relationship between individuals and the collective whole.
An attempt to draw parallels between the two original thinkers does not mean Gandhiji is being appropriated by someone or Deendayalji was a Gandhian. It simply means, whosoever tried to understand Bharat from Bharatiya point of view, they considered decolonisation as a pre-condition of nationalisation. Having the confidence in ancestral wisdom is just a part of it, making it relevant to the changing times is the key. The freedom struggle is over, and so is the context of Cold-war. In the age of globalised capitalism and violence, how we provide the true Bharatiya model for the entire world is the real challenge! While celebrating 150th birth anniversary of Gandhiji, engaging in the constructive programmes to invoke the true Dharma of Bharat would be the true tribute and the real following of Deendayalji who believed in ‘from the past, through the present, to the future’.
