Gandhigiri

NEWS REPORTS indicate that some of the descendants of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi have objected to the term Gandhigiri coined by the makers of the Bollywood film Lage Raho Munnabhai. Gandhiji belongs to all those who live and work in his spirit. The greatness of the Mahatma's legacy is that it privileges karma above kinship. So we need not give special attention to what his own kin think. But they have as much right as any of us to express their views and we should provide them a proper response if we disagree with them as I do.
As I see it, Gandhism is a much broader ideology, some aspects of which I would not rush to espouse. But Gandhigiri, as expounded by Munnabhai, touches the core of Gandhism. It sends my blood racing. Let me try and explain why. The term Gandhigiri derives from its opposite number "dadagiri." Dadagiri means the use of brutal, physical force to assert one's point of view or to get what one wants done. In one sense Gandhigiri does the same. It is also about the use of force to assert a point of view. But it is the opposite of dadagiri in the sense that the force it uses is a moral force. I seek to prevail upon the other through the use of moral force, so that the other is convinced about my point of view and agrees to change his course of action. The use of the term Gandhigiri highlights the fact that in an unjust world, change necessitates the use of force. It also emphasises that Gandhiji stood for action in the face of oppression. Not passive contemplation or individual salvation. That is why Gandhigiri appeals to Munnabhai in the first place. natural question could be — does Gandhigiri work in the context of terrorism? It would be useful here to remember that ultimately all acts of terror (whether state-sponsored or of sundry groups) derive their legitimacy from a moral basis in perceived injustice. The battle is fundamentally an ethical one. Once the moral force is established, once the wounds heal, the power of the gun will gradually diminish. This should not be seen as appeasement, for it is a path we must be committed to quite irrespective of the terrorist.
Being against division does not mean an obliteration of differences. It means precisely the opposite, in fact. We celebrate difference. As Gandhiji did in his multi-faith prayer meetings. As Swami Vivekananda did when he proclaimed that the book of God is ever being written. Our path must speak of a mutual respect for all beings and paths. But the respect has to be mutual. The way Munnabhai advises Lucky Singh's daughter to see her father in the dramatic climax of the film, is a powerful evocation of the common message of all spiritual traditions — in the words of the veteran Gandhian Satish Kumar — "you are, therefore, I am." An affirmation of the inextricable interconnectedness of all beings that the Buddha so powerfully explains. Recognition of this interconnectedness necessitates a giving up of the vocabulary and grammar of non-negotiable opposition. The Lithuanian Talmudic Emmanuel Levinas (whose centennial is being celebrated this year) would go as far as to say that an ethics of transcendence must affirm the primacy of the other.
Right from childhood, when we begin to grapple with the world's challenges, there is a Gandhi hidden in all of us — that seeks to undertake satyagraha at the very first opportunity. Slowly, the ideologies of self-centred individualism and the harsh realities of a cut-throat world, of go-getting consumerism and competition subdue the child's moral sensibilities. It is to be hoped that Lage Raho Munnabhai, set in the idiom of today's youth, will motivate them to deepen and accelerate the search for the Gandhi within — before it is too late, for them and for all of us.