More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Or again, perhaps, the very progress of science, unconnected with and isolated from moral discipline and ethical considerations, will lead to the concentration of power and the terrible instruments of destruction which it has made, in the hands of evil and selfish men, seeking the domination of others—and thus to the destruction of its own great achievements. Something of this kind we see happening now, and behind this war there lies this internal conflict of the spirit of man.
‘Not only the wisdom of centuries—also their madness breaketh out in us. Dangerous it is to be an heir.’
‘We must look the world in the face with calm and clear eyes even though the eyes of the world are blood-shot today.’
India, constituted as she is, cannot play a secondary part in the world. She will either count for a great deal or not count at all.
Was it that in spite of astonishing progress in numerous directions and the higher standards, undreamed of in previous ages, that came in its train, our modern highly industrialized civilization did not possess some essential ingredient, and that the seeds of self-destruction lay within it?
A country under foreign domination seeks escape from the present in dreams of a vanished age, and finds consolation in visions of past greatness. That is a foolish and dangerous pastime in which many of us indulge. An equally questionable practice for us in India is to imagine that we are still spiritually great though we have come down in the world in other respects.
Spiritual or any other greatness cannot be founded on lack of freedom and opportunity, or on starvation and misery. Many western writers have encouraged the notion that Indians are otherworldly. I suppose the poor and unfortunate in every country become to some extent other-worldly, unless they become revolut...
This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.
Even today, in this money age, the influence of this tradition is marked, and because of it Gandhiji (who is not a Brahmin) can become the supreme leader of India and move the hearts of millions without force or compulsion or official position or possession of money. Perhaps this is as good a test as any of a nation’s cultural background and its conscious or subconscious objective: to what kind of a leader does it give its allegiance?
‘As fire, though one, entering the world, takes a separate form according to whatever it burns, so does the inner Self within all things become different, according to whatever it enters, yet itself is without form.’
Goethe is reported to have condemned those who said that the old Roman stories of heroism, of Lucretia and others, were spurious and false. Anything, he said, that was essentially false and spurious could only be absurd and unfruitful and never beautiful and inspiring, and that ‘if the Romans were great enough to invent things like that, we at least should be great enough to believe them.’
The modern notion that the really important thing is to be comfortable is entirely foreign to the ideas underlying Greek or any other ancient literature.
Is it true that those whom we have injured, we dislike and hate?
It is called the Golden or Classical Age of India and writings of that period, which are classics in Sanskrit literature, reveal a serenity, a quiet confidence of the people in themselves, and a glow of pride at being privileged to be alive in that high noon of civilization, and with it the urge to use their great intellectual and artistic powers to the utmost.
‘La culture sanscrite a fini avec la liberté de l’Inde; des langues nouvelles, des littératures nouvelles ont envahi la territoire aryenne et l’en ont chassé; elle s’est réfugiée dans les collèges et y a pris un air pedántesque.’
‘The government of an exclusive company of merchants is perhaps the worst of all governments for any country whatever.’
A significant fact which stands out is that those parts of India which have been longest under British rule are the poorest today.
worse. The corruption, venality, nepotism, violence, and greed of money of these early generations of British rule in India is something which passes comprehension.
‘She had never lost her independence, never been enslaved. That is to say, she had never been drawn into a political and economic system whose centre of gravity lay outside her soil, never been subjected to a ruling class which was, and which remained, permanently alien in origin and character.’3
The record of British rule in India during the nineteenth century must necessarily depress and anger an Indian, and yet it illustrates the superiority of the British in many fields, not least in their capacity to profit by our disunity and weaknesses. A people who are weak and who are left behind in the march of time invite trouble and ultimately have only themselves to blame.
how easily those who accepted the highest truths of civilization disowned them with impunity whenever questions of national self-interest were involved.
Yet what could we do, how change this vicious process? We seemed to be helpless in the grip of some ad-powerful monster; our limbs were paralysed, our minds deadened. The peasantry were servile and fear-ridden; the industrial workers were no better. The middle classes, the intelligentsia, who might have been beacon-lights in the enveloping darkness, were themselves submerged in this ad-pervading gloom.
How could this happen. How did Indian society reach this level of degradation that was not even able to rise up against such exploitation? In a healthy society a revolt against a couple hundered thousand British would have been spontaneous.
The peasant starved, yet centuries of an unequal struggle against his environment had taught him to endure, and even in poverty and starvation he had a certain calm dignity, a feeling of submission to an all-powerful fate.
Janaka and Yajnavalka had said, at the dawn of our history, that it was the function of the leaders of a people to make them fearless.
But truth is at least for an individual what he himself feels and knows to be true.
the fundamental test of everything was how far it benefited the masses, and the means were always important and could not be ignored even though the end in view was right, for the means governed the end and varied it.
It is not surprising that this astonishingly vital man, full of self-confidence and an unusual kind of power, standing for equality and freedom for each individual, but measuring all this in terms of the poorest, fascinated the masses of India and attracted them like a magnet.
organizations. But the Congress had been, ever since 1920, something much more than a constitutional political party, and the breath of revolutionary action, actual or potential, surrounded it and often put it outside the pale of the law. The fact that this action was not connected with violence, secret intrigue, and conspiracy, the usual accompaniments of revolutionary activity, did not make it any the less revolutionary. Whether it was right or wrong, effective or not, may be an arguable matter, but it is manifest that it involved cold-blooded courage and endurance of a high order. Perhaps
...more
Apart from this, the whole history of India was witness to the toleration and even encouragement of minorities and of different racial groups. There is nothing in Indian history to compare with the bitter religious feuds and persecutions that prevailed in Europe. So we did not have to go abroad for ideas of religious and cultural toleration; these were inherent in Indian life.
There is nothing in Indian history to compare with the bitter religious feuds and persecutions that prevailed in Europe. So we did not have to go abroad for ideas of religious and cultural toleration; these were inherent in Indian life.
The British Government had also stood in the past, in theory at least, for Indian unity and democracy. It took pride in the fact that its rule had brought about the political unity of India, even though that unity was one of common subjection.
‘You have not only lost your own freedom but you help the British to enslave others.’
The real test of any declaration is its application in the present, for it is the present that will govern action to-day and give shape to the future …
Elections are not liked by the British Government. They spoil the routine of life and blur the picture of an India of warring creeds and parties. Without elections it is much easier to give importance to any individual or group that is deserving of favour.
whoever habitually suppresses the truth in the interests of tact will produce a deformity from the womb of his thought.
It is never wise to leave any people, even enemies, without hope.
