Scheidell 1

Stephen Scheidell
Dr. Yamamoto
HIST 105
23 March 2009
Hind Swaraj
The English sucked our life-blood (15), but we must be just to them lest swaraj be
delayed (17). The congress gave us a foretaste of swaraj (18), but it awoke in the partition
of Bengal (19), leading to two results: people saw that petitioning must be backed by
force (21), and our leaders divided into two parties: moderates and extremists (22).
Neither expulsion nor imitation of the English will lead to successful swaraj. The
state after withdrawal will depend on its manner (26). England's parliament houses
corrupt, self-serving men (29, 32). Their voting public reads the newspapers as their
Bibles and change their views every seven years; you want this for India? England is thus
because of their modern civilization (33). Taking no note of morality and religion, this
civilization seeks only bodily pleasures and even fails at that (37)! Therefore, their
people are to be pitied and their civilization abhorred (38). They came here to advance
that project via trade, and we welcomed them and their commerce. India was not lost, but
surrendered (39).
Modern civilization turns us away from God (44). Its railways, lawyers, doctors
have morally impoverished the country (47). The first of which, without foundation,
taught that we were not one nation; we were united in thought before railways (49).
Varieties of peoples do not threaten unity of a nation. If we did not rush unnaturally from
place to place, we would still think thus (51). Hindus and Muslims lived peaceably until
lawyers came to profit from their (formerly) rare disputes (59). Doctors damage the soul

Scheidell 2
by neglecting it while treating the body; they encourage immorality by offering pills to
nullify the effects of poor living rather than advice to retain health in the first place (63).
True civilization is a mode of conduct mastery over one's mind and passions
(67). We have had lawyers and doctors before the English, but they were restrained by
this self-mastery (69). India will be regained only via true civilization self-mastery. We
must expel English civilization, but not the English people (73). To free India by military
force is to Europeanize it. What is gained by force is retained only so long as that fear
remains (79). Likewise, what is gained by true civilization self-mastery, passive
resistance will be retained by the same self-mastery (81). Passive resistance gains rights
through personal suffering (90). Rather than breaking lawmakers' heads, we break the law
and suffer the consequence (91). Do not think the passive resisters weakling; those
devoid of courage cannot stand and stare down a cannon (93).
Moreover, we have little need for Western education. What need have farmers for
geography or astronomy (101)? It will not lead them to happiness. Instead, let us educate
the people in a universal Indian language, namely Hindi (105).
Each must take India for oneself (112). I say this to the extremists. To the
moderates: Mere petitioning is derogatory by confessing inferiority. To the English: You
may remain as rulers, but only if you serve those whom you rule (113).
Gandhi offers a compelling and chilling account of resistance one that we as
Christians need to seriously consider. I have grown up in a conservative home, constantly
hearing of various Christian political advocacy groups that were "protecting my right" to
freedom of religion. Gandhi forces me to question the validity of how many of these
groups operate. Granted, none were using military force to gain their ends, but they were
certainly not content with anything passive. They wanted to make the laws and not suffer

Scheidell 3
"persecution." I can hardly see these employing Gandhi's form of passive resistance. His
idea is more brilliant and daring than it seems at first glance. Passive resistance does not
lead to control of the laws, but an intense questioning of the laws, in hopes that the
policymakers will take the provoked issue into deliberation. Nonetheless, we are
provided with examples of Gandhi's passive resistance. One comes courtesy of Rev. Pat
Mahoney. Leading up to a partial-birth abortion case in early 2000, he led a group of
fellow Christians in a prayer vigil on the sidewalk in front of the Supreme Court.I
Following their arrest, many argued that freedom of speech and freedom of religion were
both breached on public sidewalks of the nation's capital. He and many with him have
been arrested under similar contexts.
What I find unique in Mahoney is that he never cries for his "rights" when he is
arrested. He protests provocatively, expecting to be arrested and suffering the
consequence. As Gandhi argues, this takes far greater courage than to fight in any of the
more "traditional" senses.
While it might be easy to see hyperbole and exaggerations in Hind Swaraj, a close
enough reading shows that it is a deceptively nuanced text. Everything he seems to
critique (technology, railways, doctors, lawyers, education, etc.) is never criticized in and
of itself. He criticizes the Western tendency toward duality bodily pleasures detached
from spiritual flourishing. At the roots of Gandhi's criticism lies an implicit anthropology.
For him, humankind is co-existing dual identities: physical and spiritual. For humankind
to flourish, both must be affirmed and nurtured. For Gandhi, the secularized Western
civilization had long since abandoned a spiritualistic anthropology. Above all, his critique
stands against what he sees as a skewed human identity.

(http://www.nlf.net/About/corresp/0005%20-%20Reverend%20Patrick%20Mahoney.html)