Two leaders;
two giants of knowledge, work and compassion - both my
heroes and having such uncanny parallels in their lives and message. And what a
legacy of work and ideas they have built for us, independently and yet to my
mind very much together.
India has had the very great
blessing of experiencing these two personalities within the last 150 years. They were contemporaries in a sense – there
was just a gap of six years between them.
One was a political leader, and the other a monk. Both were intense
patriots, but manifested their patriotism in their lives and work very differently. What is striking is that amongst all the
obvious differences, are the similarities, not just in their life experiences and
some of their core qualities, but also in the fundamental truths that they saw
and spoke about, and many a time even in expression.
Swami Vivekananda, born 1863,
acquired a modern education, almost studied law, went abroad to spread the
message of India
Mahatma Gandhi, born 1869, acquired
a modern education, studied law in England, practiced abroad, struggled for an
Indian movement in a foreign land and came back to serve his Motherland a
public figure.
There are many points of
difference in the way each one's education was acquired and the process of each
one's making. But the purpose of this
piece is not to dwell on these as much as to look at what each one of them
having made men of themselves, saw as truth and spoke.
Their patriotism was not
ordinary. It was a different quality of patriotism that understood the faults
and weaknesses of the land, but looked beyond, to the strength. Indeed, 'strength' – a growing from within
was something both emphasised constantly. Both Swamiji and Gandhiji did a
Bharath Parikrama before the beginning of their major work in India. The parikrama
gave each of them the knowledge and authority to say that his land is of
immense Ideal and strength. Neither
failed to connect the people and their practice, to their own reading and
understanding of the scriptures and shastras. Another meeting point was their thorough
reading of their own traditional scriptures.
We know from their lives how well-read each of them was in their own tradition. What’s more, both of them acquired knowledge
not just of their own tradition, but also of other cultures and
civilisations. Both of them mastered the
intricacies of alien cultures as well and won many admirers, friends, followers
from other countries and cultures as much as from their own land.
However, neither was merely a man
of books alone. They thrived and learnt
from life, living and people. Each came
into direct contact with his land, her strengths, weaknesses, diversity,
oneness during his tour on foot across India
It is a fascinating combination
of opposing forces that they worked with, or perhaps – worked on that
"thin edge of a sword"[1]
where the extremes met on a middle path and were balanced. Each never stopped dwelling and speaking at
length, of and about Ideals. They
thought, meditated, lived and breathed idealism; which is what made Swamiji say
that he preaches the message of the Upanishads, "strength, a growing from
within"; and made Gandhiji declare in almost the same words that the
ultimate goal for each man is to reach the strength within himself – 'swaraj'
or self-mastery as he called it. Nothing
is higher than this potential. Neither
was ready to lower this ideal to every day circumstances, but each was also intensely
practical and looked at the smallest details in routine daily life worked to
bring quality into each moment and action.
This way, their own lives served
as examples for their followers though differently. On this point they differ that Gandhiji as a
political figure sought to be completely transparent and hence explained in
great detail every word and action of his; he wrote his autobiography, 'The
story of my experiments with Truth'. On
the other hand the position of a monk who has renounced everything personal in
the world, holds the highest regard and devotion in the Indian psyche – so
Swamiji following the traditional path and emphasised the ideas that he
preached rather than his own life, words, and actions. His life as a lesson comes down to us only
from his direct followers who were blessed enough to have heard of it from the
original source. He himself only talked
and wrote of ideas, Indian tradition and her path. Here, we see one of the very core values of
India that both saw and declared the place of religion in Indian life and
movement.
The very essence of Swamiji's
teaching is Religion, i.e. moving Godward.
He said that each country had a goal and that of India is religion, i.e.
renunciation. Gandhiji constantly
maintained in the very same vein that each civilisation had a purpose and
Indian civilisation was not excess, but a giving up of wants, and that without
religion, or the central thought of God, any life/work stream of India would be
valueless, unethical, moral-less, lifeless.
Both advocated religious education should start at a very young age
towards the overall development of the individual.
The development of the individual
is a significant meeting point for these two Teachers. Both talk of the individual and how all
growth start from within him. Neither
stops there. Swamiji said, how if each
individual tries to manifest the strength (divinity) within him, we will have a
society and nation full of noble struggle and achievement. Gandhiji takes off on the same note, and
brought forth his concept of the oceanic circles, i.e. how the strength of each
individual radiates outward to become the strength of the village – and so on
to the strength of the nation. This is
no different from Swamiji's, 'Expansion is Life'.
Even with respect to an
individual's conviction and commitment to one ideal, they both paid allegiance
to "Truth", and both saw their work as their Truth. Swamiji had an "uncompromising regard for
Truth" even from his childhood and intensely sought to discover the
ultimate truth all truths, with which you would know the self, the world and
all creation. He also simultaneously
spoke of how the greatest philosophical truths can be found in the practical
spirituality of ordinary people and ordinary things.
We find Gandhiji declaring his
life to be a "story of his experiments with truth" – and always
struggling for an intangible, unseeable abstract truth. And he continues to say till the end that he
"worships the God that is Truth or Truth which is God through the service
of his millions", and that he "recognises no God except the God that
is to be found in the hearts of the dumb millions" It awakens the same chords of response, as
when one reads Swamiji's "would you worship the shiva in the images and
temples alone? Worship and serve the shiva in his poorest and weakest children."
This unshakeable devotion to Truth makes both of them be seen as rebels in
their younger days. Both challenged
blind conventions, and persistently resisted the status quo if it was for
nothing but the mere virtue of being status quo for years or centuries, in
their own ways. This challenge to
conventional, dogmatic beliefs continues all their lives for both of them.
It was not of their lot to
acknowledge defeat, but to throw down the gauntlet every time. Each rose with a challenge every time he
encountered blind, empty ritual, conventional thought without meaning and
fanaticism. And yet, we find that both
were the friendliest of people. Both
were brilliant conversationalists with quick ready wit and humour, and
overflowed with compassion. (Both of
them also had sharp sarcasm ready at hand to use if needed). It is said of each of them that he had a
Mother's heart, the tenderest of hearts.
But for their own purposes, both kept it away from public view and under
a veil of intellect.
Digging deeper into the
friendliness and compassion, we find each one's ability to synthesise and harmonise
contradictory thoughts and belief systems and function from common
denominators. Both, Swami Vivekananda
and Gandhiji could bring together people with extreme viewpoints and beliefs to
work together based on common ideals.
This synthesis of ideas and a
deeper insight into the nature of things that they shared, also extended to
their ideas on the East and West, their respective values, strengths and
weaknesses. They differed on the point
of expression in that, one was a political leader and saw in the West a system
of force and civilisation, a tangible enemy to the well-being of his countrymen,
and the other, a monk who deliberately kept away from politics and began at the
points of strengths of every entity, be it individual or nation. Brilliant is how each could relate profound
philosophical concepts to everyday routine activity and bring them closer to
practical life, and their very same idea of the Means and Ends of action -
wherein both maintain that one is the same as the other, there is no separation.
In the sphere of ideas, a very
significant relevant meeting of these two great men is their vision of India
and her work in the world. Both saw India
