Gandhiji and Religion Part-1 By J.B. Kripalani Gandhiji was not a philosopher or a theoretician who developed his theories and evolved a system which would give a rational explanation of life and its different facets and, if possible, its ultimate goal. If one wants to understand Gandhiji's life and work, one must try to understand his spiritual ideas and ideals in the light of which he conducted his struggles against group injustice and tyranny and carried out his reform programmes. Gandhiji's ideas grew and developed as he had to face practical situations and find solutions to problems which confronted him throughout his life. The establishment of British rule in India led to a review of existing ideas, ideals and institutions. The first impact of this contact was naturally in the religious field. This was because most of the ideas, ideals and institutions in India were, more or less, connected with religion. The result of this was the rise of new reformist sects like the Brahmo Samaj and the Prarthana Samaj. Along with the growth of these reformist sects, there were also movements within the orthodox Hindu fold to interpret andrestate the basic doctrines of Hinduism. This resulted in the establishment of the Arya Samaj and the interpretation of Hinduism by Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, Vivekananda, Ramatirtha and the Theosophical movement under the lead of Mrs. Annie Besant. This spiritual ferment was confined to Hindu society, as the Hindusmore than any other major community in India had taken to the new system of education introduced after the advent of British rule. Gandhiji was brought up, as we have said before, in a religious atmosphere. He belonged to a Vaishnavite Hindu family influenced to some extent by Jainism. His mother was a devout woman. His father often invited the learned of different faiths to discuss religious problems. In England his insistence on vegetarian diet brought him into contact with such idealist Englishmen as had given up meat diet and had become vegetarians. He also came under the influence of the Liberal thought in England of the 19th century. He had made a study of the Bible, especially the New Testament. He had also made himself familiar with the writings of Tolstoy and Emerson. In South Africa he had to work among people of many nations, races and colours. He came in contact there with Christian missionaries. Some of them were anxious to save his soul by converting him to the True Faith, Christianity. Others were not concerned so much with his soul as with the work that he wascarrying on there for the uplift of his countrymen who had become citizens of South Africa. All these contacts confirmed him in his own faith, Hinduism. But his Hinduism had little to do with, its forms or ceremonials and the institutions that it had created within itself. He rejected everything that was against reason and against humanity. Though he loved to call himself an orthodox Hindu, he did not subscribe to the pernicious and cruel system of untouchability. He did not believe in the caste system as it prevailed in India. About this he says : "God did not create men with the badge of superiority or inferiority; no scripture which labels a human being as inferior or untouchable because of his or her birth can command our allegiance. It is a denial of God and Truth which is God." He did not observe Hindu ceremonials or holy days. He rarely visited temples except sometimes through courtesy. Even then he would not enter a temple which was not open to the untouchables whom he called Harijans. He thought image worship and going to the temples were good for those who needed such props to their faith. His Hinduism was based on the teachings of the Upanishads and the Gita. Like other great reformers in Hinduism he wrote a commentary on the Gita. He moulded his life in accordance with the basic teachings of this scripture. He was a karmayogi, as described in the Gita. In accordance with its teachings he held that good works must be performed in the spirit of sacrifice to the God of humanity, especially in serving daridranarayan, God of the poor and the downtrodden. He says: "I am endeavouring to see God through service of humanity, for I know that God is neither in heaven, nor down below, but in everyone." He also says that whenever in difficulty he had recourse to the Gita and it was the solace of his life. He held that through work, done as sacrifice, without attachment, and without hankering after desired results and with equanimity, one could get the summum bonum of life, "salvation” or as he often said in accordance with the best thought of Hinduism, "self-realization". About this he says: "Man's ultimate aim is the realization of God, and all his activities, political, social and religious, have to be guided by the ultimate aim of the vision of God. The immediate service of all human beings becomes a necessary part of the endeavour simply because the only way to find God is to see Him in His creation and be one with it. This can only be done by service of all." For Gandhiji religion and morality were the same. They were interchangeable terms. This was natural for a karmayogi, who has to act in every sphere of life. Gandhiji did not believe that religious activity was separate from other activities of life, which kept society together. For him the basic principles, of this morality were truth and non-violence. These two principles were elaborated into eleven principles and a verse containing them was recited morning and evening at his prayers. These are: Ahimsa, satya, asteya, brahmacharya, asangraha, sharir shrama, aswada, sarvatra-bhaya-varjana, sarvadharma-samanatva, swadeshi, sparsh bhavana (non-violence, truth, non-stealing, chastity, non-possession, physical labour, control of the palate, fearlessness, equality of all religions, swadeshi, discarding of untouchability). The first five of these are the basic moral principles of Hinduism and Jainism. The six others are their derivatives suited to the requirements of the times. Believing in fundamental moral values common to all the great religions of the world, he said he had nothing new to give to the world. "Truth and non-violence are as old as the hills." He often said that he had no desire to create a new sect. As a matter of fact, sects are generally created not by prophets and reformers but by their followers, Christ said : I have not come to destroy the Law but to fulfil it." It can, therefore, be said that Christ was not the first Christian. However, a law can only be entirely fulfilled when it is extended and enlarged to embrace the whole of humanity. Whatever Gandhiji might have said, all those of the present generation and the innumerable generations to come who follow Gandhiji’s ideas and ideals in their spirit are truly his followers. In this who knows, as Christ said, "the first shall be the last and the last first?" With the Gita he also believed that all religions are different paths leading to the same goal. He says : "Religions are different roads converging upon the same point. What does it matter that we take different roads, so long as we reach the same goal ? In reality, there are as many religions as there are individuals. So long as there are different religions, every one of them may need some distinctive symbol. But when the symbol is made into a fetish and an instrument of proving the superiority of one's religion over others', it is fit only to be discarded." He was, therefore, tolerant of all religions, nay, he accepted their fundamental teachings. These regulated men in performing their daily tasks, which must be guided by the basic principles of morality. The moral principles were the same in all the great religions of the world, Gandhiji says: I believe in the fundamental truth of all great religions of the world. I believe that they are all God-given, and I believe that they were necessary for the people to whom these religions were revealed. And I believe that, if only we could all of us read the scriptures of the different faiths from the standpoint of the followers of those faiths, we should find that they were at the bottom all one and were all helpful to one another." Though he believed that all religions were true, he did not consider them as infallible. They were the creation of men and therefore had something of their imperfection. He says: "After long study and experience, I have come to the conclusion that (1) all religions are true; (2) all religions have error in them." He further says: "I do not believe in the exclusive divinity of the Vedas. I believe the Bible, the Koran and the Zend Avesta to be as much divinely inspired as the Vedas. My belief in the Hindu scriptures does not require me to accept every word and every verse as divinely inspired. I decline to be bound by any interpretation, however learned it may be, if it is repugnant to reason or moral sense." Gandhiji, as we have said, made no difference between religion and morality. Dharma, not as popularly understood now but as it was understood and used by the ancient Rishis, must inform and guide all our activities. "Dharma" means that which supports. As Gandhiji believed in the basic teachings of all the great religions of the world, he with his co-religionists did not believe in proselytizing activity. In his Ashram there were Muslims and Christians and pandits, but he never tried to convert them to Hinduism or even to his own brand of Hinduism. One day Mirabehn expressed a desire to become a Hindu. Gandhiji’s reply was that she should live in her own faith. By becoming a Hindu, she would not, in any way, improve her moral conduct or values. It was not necessary for a person to change his religion but to act according to the basic principles of his or her own religion. It was necessary for a Hindu to be a good Hindu, as it was necessary for a Muslim to be a good Muslim and a Christian to be a good Christian. Speaking to Christian priests in India, he told them that the humanitarian work that they did was good; but it would diminish its value if it was done with the motive of converting the followers of other faiths to Christianity. He says : "I do not believe in people telling others of their faith, especially with a view to conversion. Faith does not admit of telling. It has to be lived and then it becomes self-propagating. He did not think that religion was to be practised in a cave or on a mountain-top. It must manifest itself in all the actions of man in society. He says : "I do not conceive religion as one of the many activities of mankind. The same activity may be governed by the spirit either of religion or of irreligion. There is no such thing for me therefore as leaving politics for religion. For me every tiniest activity is governed by what I consider to be my religion."