January 1918

Bhai Chimanlal (Chinaiwala, another cotton-mill magnate),^[1]

Your letter. I have no doubt that it is our duty to help all the working classes. But I have not much faith in the co-operative movement, as at present conducted. I think we should study labour conditions first of all. How much does an average worker earn? In what quarters of the town does he live, and what are his living conditions? How much does he spend and what is his saving? What is the amount of debt he has to incur? How many children on an average he has? How does he bring them up? Where did he live formerly? What made him give up his stay there and come to the town? How has the change affected him economically, socially and morally? I think it very unwise to start co-operative societies for the labourers forthwith, without getting full answers to these questions. What is really needed is our loving identification with them. If we do so, many of the intricate problems that confront us now will be solved in a short time. My advice to you at present is to mingle with the workers freely, and have a good knowledge of their living conditions. More when we meet.

Dear Mr. Rudra,^[2]

I am dictating this letter to Mr. Desai, as owing to an acute pain in the left side I am disinclined to do much writing. What I want from you, if I can get it, is not a hastily written letter about the vernaculars but a full, enthusiastic and eloquent plea for them, which I can use for rousing the public to a sense of its duty in the matter. Why would you have teaching in the vernaculars and answers in English? Why should every lad have to know English ? Is it not enough if some men are specially trained in each province, so that they may diffuse among the nation through the vernaculars a knowledge of new discoveries and researches ? So doing, our boys and girls will become saturated with the new knowledge, and we may expect a rejuvenation such as we have never witnessed during the past sixty years. I feel more and more that if our boys are to assimilate facts of different sciences, they will only do so, if they receive their training through the vernaculars. No half measures will bring about the much-needed reform. Until we attain this state of things, I fear that we shall have to let the Englishmen think for us, and we must continue slavishly to imitate them. No scheme of self government can avert the catastrophe, if it does not involve this much-needed change. If you feel with me, I want your letter expressing the above views in your own language.

I had a very nice time of it in Calcutta, but not in the Congress pandal. It was all outside the pandal. I was enraptured to witness "The Post Office" performed by the Poet^[3] and his company. Even as I dictate this, I seem to hear the exquisitely sweet voice of the Poet and the equally exquisite acting on the part of the sick boy. Bengali music has for me a charm all its own. I did not have enough of it, but what I did have had a most soothing effect upon my nerves which are otherwise always on trial.

You will be glad to learn that, at the Social Service Conference, I made full use of my privilege as the President and as a lover of so much that is good in Bengali life, to speak strongly against Bengali provincialism. The audience did not resent it. It seemed to appreciate my remarks. I am sending you a copy of my address which, of course, does not contain the personal appeal mentioned above.

I have not given you a tenth of my experiences, but Mr. Desai reminds me that I must give you one more. I attended a Humanitarian League meeting. There, too, I was the President, and I felt that I should be untrue to myself and the audience, if I did not touch upon the devilish worship going on at the Kalighat. I, therefore, spoke about it without mincing words. I was watching the audience while I was speaking. I am unable to say whether I made any impression upon it. Anyway, I eased my conscience by referring to the matter fairly fully. If I had sufficient fire in me, I would stand in front of the lane leading to the Ghat and stop every man and woman from blaspheming God in the name of religion.

I return your letter on the vernaculars for you to refresh your memory.

Yours,

M. K. Gandhi

Bhai Kalyanbhai,

I have received your letter. I see only two courses open to that woman, one of which, and decidedly the better one, is; She should put her learning to good use, and try through it to reform her husband with whom destiny has joined her. There have been many women in the past who have succeeded in converting their husbands to a good way of life; but for that achievement, she should be endowed with spiritual wisdom. If she does not possess that wealth, she should gather courage and refuse pointblank to go to her husband. If there is a possibility of undue pressure being applied on her at her father's house, she has every right to leave it. In that case, some friend must come forward to accommodate her in his home. If it is not possible to afford her such shelter in village areas, she may be taken out of them to some town. I wish you proved through action your friendship with her by providing her some safe refuge. But you may first try the better course given above.

An extract from a letter :

Who should write the preface to a compilation^[4] of my speeches and writings? Or does it need a preface at all? These questions can be answered only after knowing the name of the publisher and his object in undertaking the work. If it is a regular publishing concern, the book needs a preface from Sarojini. If it is some devout Vaishnava (follower of Lord Vishnu), he must approach Ranchhorbhai for the preface. If it is an unknown reader of my writings, who wants to publish the book provided he gets a guarantee of some return in money, he must contact my friend, Dr. (Pranjivandas) Mehta (a rich life-long friend of Gandhiji). There is no need for a preface at all, if either you or Mathuradas are going to hold the copyright. At present, at least, I am myself like an animal marked out in Falis' Circus and there is no need, except for reasons stated above, to get any stamp on the book through a preface. There can be only one worthy object in its publication: to provide for as many as possible a facility to know my thoughts, so long as the tempo lasts. I have, of course, a fondness, may be an over fondness, for those thoughts and, naturally, I would wish to share them with the largest possible number. It is the record of my own activities that has suggested the publication of the book. Where then is the need of a preface written by me? My practice of my views is itself the right preface. He who can read that preface will get an impetus to read through the book."

To Messrs. Liengier & Co., Madura.

The method that I have adopted for reinstating those who have left off weaving, is to supply them with yarn at the lowest market rates, to buy out all the cloth they may manufacture for cash at the highest market rates, the yarn to be paid for in instalments, without interest, convenient to the weaver. This has enabled them to earn about Rs. 17 per month. These weavers do not give their whole time to weaving, and their manufacture is confined to the coarsest cloth. They do not want to aspire higher, and what they earn is enough for their wants. But I know that a clever weaver manufacturing finer counts, with perhaps a little pattern-work, can make 25 rupees per month. Every weaver lost to the country is, in my opinion, so much national waste, and every weaver reinstated is so much national gain. Whatever the plan you adopt, I would like you to keep me informed of your activity from time to time.

Your servant

M. K. Gandhi

In reply to Kaka's^[5] letter questioning how the Professor's^[6] incarceration could be called a satyagraphic act, why he should not have appealed, etc. :

When a person is accused of a crime, he is either guilty or innocent. If he is guilty, he should go to jail as an act of penance. If innocent, he should go to jail to provide the judge a good lesson. If all those who are unjustly convicted choose to go to jail after declaring their innocence, it will come to pass that in due time hardly any innocent person may be sent to jail. This much to show the principle in general. In the Professor's particular case, there are many distinguishing features. The case instituted against him was not really for rash driving at all. They wanted through the case to make me and through me the whole agrarian satyagraha movement unpopular among the masses. They had imagined that, even if nothing could be done against me personally, the harassment of one of mine would gratify my opponents. Under these circumstances, it was neces-sary for the Professor to show what mettle he possessed. The ryots of these parts are very much afraid of jail besides. Here was the chance to make them fearless and it could not be allowed to go waste. Even for the Professor himself, a golden opportunity had fallen to his lot unsought and it would have been foolish to fritter it away. And what is satyagraha but resistance against injustice through self-suffering ? The court's finding was sheer injustice. The Professor offered satyagraha by cheerfully accepting the unjust sentence and suffering imprisonment. It is entirely outside the pale of satyagraha to appeal against any judgment whatsoever. There is no room for offering any defence in pure and untainted satyagraha. The satyagraha we witness at present is not pure but diluted, and the degree of the strength of that dilution affords at once a measure and a sign of our own weakness. It is my firm faith that the world will stand aghast with wonder and admiration when it first witnesses the glory and grandeur of a pure and undiluted satyagraha. So as a matter of a satyagrahic principle, it was certain that an appeal could never be preferred. But this question of application of that principle was not the prime reason for dropping the idea of an appeal. I felt that the charge was so frivolous that it did not deserve the glorified importance of an appeal. By desisting from the temptation of an appeal, we have been able, I think, to expose very easily the partiality or the foolishness of the judge. No lawyer, moreover, was able to give us an assurance of success, if an appeal was made, and I warned the pleaders to file it, if they wanted to, on their own responsibility. I told them, 'If you lose the appeal, I am certain to put the blame on your shoulders.' In this case, besides, no 'appeal' could be filed. All we could do was to pray for a 'revision', and the higher court never enters into the facts of a revisional case. It only amends an error on a point of law. In this particular case, there was no possibility to success through a technicality in law. You will thus see that in our acceptance of the sentence, not only has the principle of satyagraha been observed, but also, what the world calls, practical wisdom.

Chi. Jamnadas,

You are going to gain nothing by leaving your work there and coming over here to stay with me. You will yourself get tired in a few days and then wistfully remember the post of duty you are now at.

What you should, therefore, do is to seek enjoyment in your work there. Your desire to stay with me is at present a kind of a craving for passion. And just as a man feels tired and depressed when that enjoyment is over, you will feel a sense of ennui within a short time of your stay here. You may, however, certainly cherish the ideal of being able to come here to stay with me some day, and in the meanwhile, try to grow fit for it by efficiently discharging the duties and responsibilities on hand."

To a salt doctor :

Dear Dr. Kulkarni,

When I posted my last letter to you, I had read the literature sent by you, but for me it was not convincing enough to turn me from my experiment. What you say is either true or untrue. If salt is the panacea for all evils, no effort should be spared to double or even quadruple its consumption. What I require is statistics showing the successful treatment of plague etc. by the saline method. Having read a great deal against salt in books on vegetarianism, I wanted to make the experiment on myself. Nearly 7 years ago, Mrs. Gandhi was suffering from copious hemorrhage. I was treating her with Kuhne (a German hydropath) baths and a strict dietary. When I was almost in despair, I thought of the reasoning applied against salt by Dr. Wallace and against pulses by Dr. Haig. Salt, Dr. Wallace has argued, is an irritant and a stimulant. Being inorganic it passes out without being assimilated, but with passage making a great deal of mischief. It unduly excites the salivary glands, irritates the stomach and thus induces men to eat more than they need and taxing the organs unduly, it impoverishes the blood. Both Mrs. Gandhi and I were like most people lovers of salt and ate large quantities of it. I argued to myself that probably the introduction of salt in the system was responsible for the conti-nuation of her illness. I need not enter into the reasoning applied by me to the pulses. I was myself at this time ordinarily hale and hearty. Certainly, no change on the score of health was called for. But discovering that I could not warn Mrs. Gandhi from the use of salt and pulses without doing so myself, I left them off and so did she. There was no other change made in the treatment. Within a week's time she was free from hemorrhage, and she who was at the time of change a skeleton quickly put on flesh. I have ever since remained without salt. The condiment has such a hold upon her that she could not resist the temptation when there was no necessity for it. So, when she had completely recovered, she took to salt eating. She does have hemorrhages now and then and leaving off salt and taking friction baths enables her to recover quickly. During the seven years of my experiments, I have treated asthmatics and patients suffering from other lung diseases with a saltless diet, and they have almost invariably res-ponded. As for myself, I have not suffered from serious illnesses any more than those with whom I come in daily contact. This saltless diet has, I believe, materially assisted me in my 'Brahmacharya' (celibacy) vow. With these experiences before me, your persistent advocacy of salt has come upon me with somewhat of a shock. There is one great change in me which I have been noticing, and which I have discussed with medical friends without getting any light from them. If I receive a wound, it heals more quickly than before. I experience no feeling of excessive fatigue after long walks. But I seem to have become a green stick. The skin has become too tender and delicate. A knife would tear it much more quickly than anybody else's. Although I invariably walk barefoot, the soles of my feet refuse to become tough and hard, as would anybody else's. My gums have become flabby and the few teeth I have left are more ornamental than useful. Is it possible that this delicateness is the result of a saltless diet? Of course, there are so many other changes that I have made in my life, that it is difficult to single out salt for my condemnation. If I had not noticed this deterioration in me? if it is a deterioration? I should have, owing to the many other advantages I have experienced, very actively advocated a saltless diet. If I received some enlightened assistance from you, I would like, if it be for a temporary period, to go back to salt and watch its results upon my system. I was already conferring with Dr. Dev upon the advisability of interrupting my experiment when your letter came. Hence my last letter to you. If you have an accurate knowledge about the matter, and if you are an enthusiast with a scientific mind which would refuse to swerve even by a hair's breadth from the path of truth, even in a fit of enthusiasm I would like to utilize your services, both for plague research and for finding out the real value of salt as an article of human consumption. I shall try to secure the books you have mentioned.

Yours

M. K. Gandhi

Bhaisri Mavlankar,^[7]

I have received your letter re. the draft of the (Gujarat) Sabha's reply to the Government press-note on the failure of crops this year in the Kaira District. I find the first part of the rejoinder quite good, but the last part is as weak in argument as the first is strong. I am not bothering about making corrections. A more telling answer could be given to the Government's contention that an institution working from outside has no locus standi in the district and can do nothing for it. Even if not a single member of the Gujarat Sabha came from that district, it is not only the right but the duty of the Sabha to voice the grievances of the people in distress in any part of Gujarat. There was, besides, the need of giving the names of the member of the Inquiry Committee. The distinction that has been made between senior and junior officials is improper, as it means an unconscious admission on our part that, if there had been senior officials on the Inquiry Committee, they would have made a proper and detailed inquiry. Our claim, however, is that, in comparison with experienced and responsible non-official public leaders, Government officials are less trustworthy inquirers because of their official position itself. The Government appoints them to serve its own and their selfish interests. As it is to their advantage to do so, they are in the habit of pooh-poohing any plea of hardship advanced by the people. A public leader, on the other hand, has no axe to grind, is unbiassed and, knowing that no error on his part would be forgiven, is more careful and exact in his inquiry. We should have brought out all these points quite clearly. Our object is to educate the people in national consciousness through this dispute, and we want to show that as public leaders, we are as eager to maintain our own prestige as the government is to maintain its own. While the government very often keeps up its prestige through its physical might, let us do so only through our just actions. It is a great training for swaraj, if the people get a clear idea of this our contention through our reply, and then a vivid experience of its truth through our acts. That is why I have gone into a criticism of the draft to this extent.

Another thing that strikes me is this : At such a time an immediate action alone has any value. The members of the Committee must give up all their other work and attend its sittings. In short, the Committee cannot afford to be dilatory in its work. It must have as members only such able and responsible men as can present themselves whenever the Committee wants them. If our case is based on just grounds, it is a question of the protection of thousands of poor men. Just as it is our wont to leave everything else in order to serve our own personal interest, so are we bound to give up everything for the sake of public interest, and to do this ought to be a tacit vow of every public worker. I think we have been very late in our reply. It often happens that the Government, through its ceaseless vigilance, is able to suppress a public movement. "Equity helps the vigilant and not the indolent" is not a maxim to be repeated parrot-like in law courts but it is one that has to be followed in everyday life. It is just because you all are doing such splendid work and are sincere and steadfast, that I have given the draft the dignity of so much criticism. Had I wanted to say you were all idlers, I would have expressed my thought more effectively by keeping severely silent. It is my practice not to waste my time in writing condemnatory letters.

This letter is outcome of my love and my wish that there may be, through it, greater alertness among you people, and the institution, already 30 years old, may rise still higher in prestige. Do not commit the mistake of considering the letter as the lash of a whip and don't feel depressed by it.

Vande Mataram,

Mohandas

Bankipur,

Mavlankar's letter (in substance) from Ahmedabad: "Your idea that, if the peasants of Kaira are in real distress, they should allow the Government to sell off their lands instead of paying their revenues by incurring debts or selling their cattle, appears to Devdhar and Thakkar^[8] like a gratuitous advice to a fellow mouse to go out to bell the cat, while keeping itself to the security of the hole. They suggest that we collect a lakh of rupees by public subscription, and lend them to the peasants to enable them to pay their dues. They think we could put the Government to shame that way. Hence the perplexity of Mavlankar. He writes further to say in effect: "Their suggestion is quite opposed to yours and I am in a quandary as to what I should do, whether I should sit still and do nothing or do that which goes entirely against your view. I feel myself at sea".

Gandhiji's reply :

I can perfectly visualize your perplexity arising from two conflicting suggestions. It was only when faked Nalas^[9] who were king Nala's exact replicas, faced Damayanti that she was in deep distress. But that alone is real firmness which is shown at such a crisis. It is also true that it is no easy thing to remain firm at such times, and errors, in the choice of the right step, are most often excusable. I can myself see something in the idea of collecting a lakh of rupees and paying the Government dues through them, but that attempt will not succeed in reforming the ways of the Government. I do not think that the Government will feel ashamed and sorry, if we come forward to pay the dues of the peasants through the amount.

On the other hand, it will be a serious headache for the Government to impound and sell the peasants' cattle. The object behind the idea of offering satyagraha is to make the people fearless and free, and not to maintain our own reputation anyhow. If, out of fear of the consequences or want of faith in us, people pay up the dues, they deserve the distress the payment entails; but we must strive still harder to win their confidence and not leave them in the lurch. This is the straight and narrow path for the satyagrahi. If I possess a lakh of rupees, I would go to every homestead and tell the inmates : "Let them sell off your live-stock, but you must never pay the revenues by borrowing from others". And when the auction takes place, I would buy up the animals and return them to those only who had thus bravely stood the test. But I would never tell them beforehand that I was going to buy up their cattle. This is the time when, if all goes well with us, the Government would be compelled to give a near apology to the public.

All this dissertation, however, is like wisdom after the event and so of small value. You must continue to do only that which you think the best under the situations that may face you from time to time. I get thereby the coveted benefit of watching your moves from this distance, and you get the invaluable experience of the truth that no man is indispensable in this changing world."

Miss West's^[10] letter :

Mr. Govindoo tells me that Manilal (Gandhiji's second son) is very miserable about getting old and not being married. What are you going to do about this ? Will he always have to remain single ?

Gandhiji's letter to Manilal :

Devibehn writes that you unburdened yourself to Sam (another colleague) your uneasiness at still remaining unmarried. You must not feel shy of putting all your thoughts before me. I am not your jailor but your friend. I will give you some good advice and you may consider it, and then do what you think best. I wish you never committed a sin out of fear from me. I want you to have no fear from anybody including me.

I think you should not marry. In Brahmacharya lies your ultimate good. But, if it becomes unbearable to you to remain a bachelor, you may come here when you can free yourself from the work there, and take steps to get married. It is clear that nothing could be done in the matter at your end. If you are intent on marriage, I suppose you can find a bride here. I take it that you will not give up your work there immediately, just in order to get married. You can rightly think of marriage only after seeing that the "Indian Opinion" goes on in your absence. On no account should you feel miserable, nor should you indulge in day-dreams and fancies. We pine for a thousand things, but cannot get all of them. Let this truth soak into you and give you peace. You must make it a point to do whatever you choose to in the open, straightforward way, and all will be well with you.

I may have to enter into a big fight for Mohammed Ali's^[11] release, but nothing has been decided as yet.

Blessings,

Bapu.

To Miss West :

Dear Devi,

Manilal's case is sad. I have written to him a consoling letter. It is difficult for me to be reconciled to his marriage. If he can stand a few more years of bachelor's life, he will get hardened. I have told him that he is to consider himself entirely as a free man, and to receive my advice as from a friend. You are all just now going through fire. May you all come out unburnt.

Here I am in the midst of three imminent battles of passive resistance; which will ultimately take place, it is difficult to say. But they just now absorb all my time and keep me constantly on the wheels. This journeying is an exhaustive process, but it has got to be gone through.

With love,

Yours,

Bhai.

1. ↑ Vande Mataram? I bow to Mother (India). The words form the title of a patriotic song in the Bengali novel 'Anandamath' by Bankimchandra Chatterjee. They shot into national importance, as a greeting and an exhortation, when boys shouting "Vande Mataram" were punished under Lord Curzon's regime. The whole song? specially the first two stanzas?soon became India's national anthem.
2. ↑ Principal of St. Stephens' College, Delhi, conducted by the Cambridge Mission. He was the first Indian to hold the high post there. Mr. C. F. Andrews, afterwards called "Deenbandhu" (brother of the lowly) by Indians for his devoted services to India, started his Indian career as a Professor in this college. Though a Mission college, it had an atmosphere of respect for all religions, and even nationalism was encouraged. It was Mr. Andrews who first brought Gandhiji into contact with Principal Rudra. Gandhiji used to put up with him whenever he visited Delhi.
3. ↑ Gandhiji used to refer to Rabindranath Tagore as "the Poet".
4. ↑ Reference to the book 'Thought-world of Mahatma Gandhiji' (in Gujarati) edited by Mathuradas Trikamji.
5. ↑ Kaka Kalelkar, a very close disciple of Gandhiji who, though a Deccani by birth, has been rendering yeoman services to the Gujarati literature, and was made once the President of the Gujarati Literary Conference.
6. ↑ During the Champaran satyagraha, a procession was taken out and Sri J.B. Kriplani (a college Professor who had resigned to join the fight) was riding on a horse in it. He was accused of 'rash driving' and sentenced to 3 weeks' imprisonment. The Ashram inmates used to call him 'Professor'. He was once the President of the Indian National Congress and is now a distinguished Opposition leader.
7. ↑ Quite early in his career, Mr. G. V. Mavlankar made his mark not only as a lawyer of repute in Ahmedabad, but also as a staunch nationalist leader, suffering incarcerations as the natural consequence. The people honoured him afterwards by making him the first Speaker of free India's Loksabha, "House of the People".
8. ↑ G. K. Devdhar and A. V. Thakkar were members of Gokhale's “Servants of India Society”: Sri Thakkar came afterwards to be known as “Bapa” (father) for his services of aborigines and depressed classes.
9. ↑ From a story in the Mahabharata. Knowing that Damayanti, a princess of entrancing beauty, was resolved upon choosing king Nala as her husband in her 'Swayamvara' (a gala concourse of suitors from among whom a princess could choose a husband), four gods took the exact form of Nala and five Nalas appeared before her. On her supplication, however, the Devas (gods) resumed their forms and she could marry the right Nala. Then they blessed her for her fidelity with four boons.
10. ↑ Sister of Mr. West, Gandhiji's colleague in S. Africa who helped in the printing of Gandhiji's journal, "Indian Opinion".The inmates of the Phoenix Settlement called her 'Devibehn'.
11. ↑ Messrs. Mohammad Ali and Shaukat Ali who were in jail for their pro-khilafat and anti-government speeches. They were ardent associates of Gandhiji in his Non-Cooperation Movement of 1921.