Joyfulltimes
Be the joy you want to see in the world through the power of your word
This site is dedicated to the creative power within each of us to speak a positive and joy-filled life and world into existence by our impeccable words.
Author Name:   Tam Zelig
Article Name:  MOHANDAS K.GHANDI: The Story of My Experiments with Truth
E-Mail Address:   tom@joyfulltimes.com
Website Address:
 
Home
 
Copyright Info:
All Materials on this or
any page Joyfulltimes
is copyrighted and may
not be reproduced
without permission of
the author and full
disclosure of author
and Joyfulltimes.com
as source.


The first quote I would like to comment on is the title. Ghandi points out that he was reluctant to write an autobiography since
it is not something that Easterners do. It is his belief that the deeds are far more important than the life, and I would tend to
agree. Perhaps it is the genres of autobiography and biography that have helped to maim the great art of storytelling. Maybe it
would be best if we remember our heroes mythically rather than warts and all. At any rate, what Ghandi finally agreed to do
was to chronicle what he calls his great “experiments with truth.”  I like the concept of viewing life as an experiment with
discovery of something. It doesn’t matter whether it’s truth or joy or life itself, but we are here on a mission, and it is unique
and personal to each one of us.

“Still both Harischandra and Shravana are living realities to me” (5). Ghandi was affected most as a child by two plays having
to do with following truth and principles and honoring parents at all costs. I like the idea that the theatre affected this great man
of simplicity. Too often forms of entertainment are cast aside as “sinful” and unnecessary to a spiritual life, and I of course
disagree. There is no “good” and “evil” in the traditional sense. There is only that which touches, teaches, and transforms us,
and that which does not. I am not certain Ghandi would totally agree with my last statement, but certainly he understood the
value of judging something on its own merits rather than on the stereotypical view.

“I know that nothing is impossible for pure love.” And, “God ultimately saves him whose motive is pure” (10).  What a
powerful statement. The comment was made in the context of Ghandi’s perception that his “lusts” for his wife almost
destroyed him, but the principle here is a powerful one. I think this has to do with intention. I am learning of late that we must
always have before us, in any project great or small, a clear intention of where we want to go. This means both a vision and a
focus. Not too long a go I took a motorcycle riding safety course. One of the main things I took away from that course is the
spiritual principle I think is being referred to here. A common mistake for novice cyclists is that when they go into a turn, they
keep their eyes on the road ahead of them. In a sharp turn this could prove deadly. The correct procedure is to turn your eyes
and focus to where you want to end up. When you do that, you get there.

“As we know that a man often succumbs to temptation, however much he may resist it, we also know that providence often
intercedes and saves him in spite of himself” (20).  I think this has much to do with the previous quote, and in that, I would
disagree with Ghandi’s suggestion that it is “in spite of himself.”  There is a section in Proverbs that says, “Raise up a child in
the way he should go, and he will not depart from it when he is old.” That doesn’t say he or she won’t take some side trips in-
between youth and “old,” but ultimately the intention that is formed in our youth will guide us even when we are unaware of it.
Therefore, the education of our young is vitally important, and Ghandi will later have some things to say about that.


“The canker of suspicion was rooted out only when I understood Ahimsa in all of its bearings. I saw then the glory of
Brahmacharya and realized that the wife is not the husband’s bondslave, but his companion and his helpmate, and an equal
partner in all his joys and sorrows – as free as the husband to choose her own path” (21).  Let me first define the two terms
mentioned above. Ahimsa means literally not-hurting or non-violence, and Brahmacharya means conduct that leads one to
God. The connotation that Ghandi gives it is self-restraint or mastery over one’s sexual organ. So the great revelation here is
that our desire for possession and rulership is intimately connected with our love of violence. I have no doubt that there is
some primal connection here. I disagree that the only way to root it out is by sexual abstinence. Gluttony and eating are also
intimately related, but it is possible to gain mastery over gluttony without giving up eating. What does need to be abstained
from is the concept of possession. How arrogant it is for a country to say I own this land or this air space or this water. It is
equally arrogant to believe we could own another soul. How can you own that which has no substance. In the eternal scheme
of things it is like claiming each snowflake that falls. The moment we reach out to “possess” it, it vanishes and is no more. All
we can do is enjoy the snowflake and hold its softness and delicateness in our memory. So too let us enjoy our partners and
allow them to receive joy from us in return. The body will fade away as quickly as the snowflake, but those moments of joy
and connection will be with us always.

For a bowl of water give a goodly meal;
For a kindly greeting bow thou down with zeal;
For a simple penny pay thou back with gold;
If thy life be rescued, life do not withhold.
Thus the words and actions of the wise regard;
Every little service tenfold they reward.
But the truly noble know all men as one,
And return with gladness good for evil done  (31).

Although this is not a quote from Ghandi, it is one that he said, “gripped my mind and heart. Its precept – return good for evil
– became my guiding principle” (30). I don’t think it needs any comment.

“Experience has taught me that silence is part of the spiritual discipline of a votary of truth. Proneness to exaggerate, to
suppress or modify the truth, wittingly or unwittingly, is a natural weakness of man, and silence is necessary in order to
surmount it. A man of few words will rarely be thoughtless in his speech; he will measure every word”  (55).  Here again we
see a common theme regarding words and speech – the value of silence to communicate properly. I am trying to promote the
Thumper philosophy of speaking – “If you can’t say nothin’ nice, then don’t say nothin’ at all.

“Pure truth, they hold is out of the question in business, one can speak it only so far as is suitable” (109).  Ghandi, of course,
refutes this. I agree, although I do believe there are times when pure truth is not a good thing. I have discussed this before, but
my exceptions would only have to do with times when the “pure truth” might cause embarrassment or pain to someone
unnecessarily.

“I had long since taught myself to follow the inner voice.  I delighted in submitting to it.  To act against it would be difficult and
painful to me” (118).  I thought this was a wonderful tribute to self. I have found that it is very liberating to begin to trust
yourself. I think this is more often than not a trademark of successful people. This is the kind of thing we should be helping
others to achieve, and indeed this would certainly be a part of any section of interpersonal communication teaching.

I am next going to give you a string of quotes dealing with religion – primarily Christianity. I won’t be commenting on them
other than to point out that his criticism is not just of Christianity, but of Hinduism as well, and I think, by inference, of all
organized religion.  

It was more than I could believe that Jesus was the only incarnate son of God, and that only he who believed in him would
have everlasting life. If God could have sons, all of us were his sons. If Jesus was like God, or God Himself, then all men were
like God and could be God Himself....Again, according to Christianity only human beings had souls, and not other living
beings, for whom death meant complete extinction; while I held a contrary belief....Philosophically there was nothing
extraordinary in Christian principles....Thus if I could not accept Christianity as a perfect, or the greatest, religion, neither was I
then convinced of Hinduism being such....What was the meaning of saying the Vedas were the inspired Word of God? If they
were inspired, why not also the Bible and the Koran  (119)?


“I had learnt at the outset not to carry on public work with borrowed money. One could rely on people’s promises in most
matters except in respect of money” (131). This is an important insight to me for a number of reasons. Perhaps the least of
which involves broken promises. I know that Ghandi is also not as concerned with other’s broken promises as his own. If he
makes commitments based on the promises of others, so too is his integrity based on those promises. This is an important
point, but also there is a principle that he will express later on which I find even more compelling. If you are doing public work,
then the public should support it. If they do not, then the work is not to be done yet. I am trying to work out that principle in
my own life, and especially with respect to the newspaper and the formation of the community. Another important aspect of
public work and finances is his following quote; “Carefully kept accounts are a sine qua non for any organization. Without
properly kept accounts it is impossible to maintain truth in its pristine purity”  (132).  No public business should need to keep
any part of its financial record secret. For that matter I’m not sure that any business should.

“The heart’s earnest and pure desire is always fulfilled” (134). This is similar to the above quote regarding intention, but it is
such an important concept that I really don’t mind repeating it. Ghandi uses the term “always” which goes against the idea that
in a debate one should never use terms like “never,” “always,” “all people,” etc. But this is a law that doesn’t change, in my
opinion. I may have used this analogy before, but it is like mixing colors. If I mix blue and yellow together, I’m going to get
green. It doesn’t matter if I believe it or not. It doesn’t matter how much “faith” I have in the process; it doesn’t matter
whether I am absolutely certain it won’t work. If I mix blue and yellow together, I get green. So it is with pure intentions. They
will always be fulfilled, which is why the phrase “be careful what you wish for” is true. But what about all those times I really,
really wanted a million dollars and I didn’t get it? I do not believe that God is a cosmic slot machine that dispenses rewards
either by whim or by choice. Rather I believe that the world has been set up to operate under certain principles, like gravity,
and they are designed to work without effort. This is the key to the above question. There are two qualifiers to Ghandi’s
comments and I think those are important, earnest and pure. Earnest means that you ask truly believing. Too often we
substitute effort for belief. “If I just pray hard enough, maybe I’ll get it.” This is not belief.  And purity has to do with asking for
things that are in line with your best interests. Now, as I said before, we could get things that are not in our best interest, but I
believe that happens because the universe does not listen to words so much as our heart when we ask. We can ask for
prosperity with true belief that it will happen, but our heart is really sending the message, “I am not worthy so don’t give it to
me.” Or, “What I really want is to not have to face success, so just keep letting me fail. It is always our true, pure intention that
is granted. The only other factor that must also be considered is Karma. This is the purest intention since it is established, in my
opinion, prior to our coming back. I realize that I may have left more questions then I have answered in regards to my beliefs
in this matter, but I earnestly believe I should move on.

“It has always been a mystery to me how men can feel themselves honoured by the humiliation of their fellow-beings” (135).  I
feel the same wonder. I would add to that a wonder that humans can choose to live with violence rather than peace. I have a
theory that I may expound upon in my final novel-dissertation so stay tuned.

“Yet even differences prove helpful, where there are tolerance, charity and truth” (139). This could be referenced to the above
quote as well. Living in peace or unity does not mean that we must all be cut from the same mold. Part of the beauty I see in
our world is the diversity of beliefs and customs. I love coming upon these differences and getting to learn something new. I
may or may not choose to incorporate it into my life, but I am always richer for it.

“I was confirmed in my opinion that religion and morality were synonymous” (147). Gandhi is a prime example of the type of
person we talked about last semester. He followed the extremes of morality. One difference is that he never expected others
to do what he did, but I think, truth be told, he would have been very comfortable in the kind of orthodox society that would
require such strict observance of morality.


“Such service can have no meaning unless one takes pleasure in it. When it is done for show or from fear of public opinion, it
stunts the man and crushes his spirit. Service, which is rendered without joy, helps neither the servant nor the served. But all
other pleasures and possessions pale into nothingness before service which is rendered in the spirit of joy”  (153).  This
concept is also related to the earlier on of intention, but here we have a new element, which is an important one to me. That
concept is “joy.”  Ghandi calls it “pleasure.”  Since this is also an area that I have written on before, I won’t spend a lot of time
here, but I believe that the greatest and highest intention we can have is joy for ourselves and for others. What about love?
This is my opinion, but my reasoning is that you can have love without joy. I always love my daughters, but I am not always
happy or joyful with them. But with joy there is always love; therefore I rate joy higher. The expression I have used before,
and it continues to serve me well is that “All things that we ask for and receive comes to us on the avenue of joy.”

“What barrier is there that love cannot break” (158).  As I mentioned above, love must be partnered with joy in order to
reach the highest intention, but once this is done there is nothing that can defeat the person who has attained to this place.
Ghandi was one, but it is not out of anyone’s reach to do so.

“My experience has shown me that we win justice quickest by rendering justice to the other party” (160).  This is the principle
of giving and receiving. The quickest way to get what you want is to give it to others. I believe in the principle, I have seen it
work in my own life.  Again, though, the real trick is to do your giving joyfully, although sometimes the principle works even
when you follow it grudgingly. But, what I don’t understand is why anyone would want to live his or her life any other way, but
with joy. The teacher Jesus asked if worrying would add one cubit to our stature, and the obvious answer is no. We prove to
ourselves time and time again that worrying does not change things. It only weakens us and drains our energy. Changes occur
when we choose to or something causes us to break the chains of sorrow and put on the garment of joy.

“It has been my firm conviction that it is not good to run public institutions on permanent funds…. When such an institution
ceases to have public support, it forfeits the right to exist” (172).  This quote I have taken to heart for my publication, The
Joyfull Times. I am not going quite as far as Ghandi and refusing all advertising, but I will limit the numbers to no more than
10% of the issue. The principle is also an important one. If this is to be a paper for the people rather than to feed the ego of
Tam Zelig, then it must be supported by them. I have made peace with the fact that I will cease to work on the publication if it
becomes apparent that there isn’t enough financial or writing support to sustain it.

“And where a choice has to be made between liberty and learning, who will not say that the former has to be preferred a
thousand times to the latter” (176). Ghandi shortly goes on to call schools and colleges, “citadels of slavery” (176).  Any
chance that I can find a quote aimed against the system, I will note it. Ghandi does not clearly explain his sentiments in this
book, but I can surmise that it has a great deal to do with the dehumanizing aspect of the system. I, of course, must point out
that he was commenting on the British system in the early 1900’s, but I believe that we haven’t come very far since then at
personalizing education, especially at the lower levels.

A writer almost always presents one aspect of a case, whereas every case can be seen from no less than seven points of view,
all of which are probably correct by themselves, but not correct at the same time and in the same circumstances.And then
many books are written with a view to gaining customers and earning name and fame. Let those, therefore, who read such
books as these do so with discernment, and take advice of some experienced man before trying any of the experiments set
forth, or let them read the books with patience and digest them thoroughly before acting upon them (238).

I thought this to be particularly good advice in this day of the self-help book explosion. As much as I love writing and would
also love to be published, I firmly believe that there is no substitute for one on one, face to face teaching and learning. As I
have pointed out before, I believe in the Socratic assessment of the danger of the written word, and that is that it will make
some believe they are smarter than they really are.

In the very first month of Indian Opinion, I realized that the sole aim of journalism should be service. The newspaper press is a
great power, but just as an unchained torrent of water submerges whole countrysides and devastates crops, even so an
uncontrolled pen serves but to destroy. If the control is from without, it proves more poisonous than want of control. It can be
profitable only when exercised from within (253)

This is another of those quotes that I have personally taken to heart in regards to my newest adventure as editor and publisher.
The idea of being primarily in existence to serve rather than to profit by would be a wonderful litmus test for most media
today. Of course I can see the difficulty in defining the term “service” as well as defining whom you are serving. There is some
great advice from a book by Sam Keen called, Fire in the Belly. He admonishes us to first discover where we are going
before we decide on who is going with us. Although this is given as advice to couples, I see no reason that it cannot work for
businesses as well.

“The brute by nature knows no self-restraint. Man is man because he is capable of, and only in so far as he exercises, self-
restraint”  (282). Self-restraint is another one that begs a definition. Where Ghandi took this may not be the place that others
of us are meant to go in this lifetime. I’m not even certain that it should be a destination for all of us. In the analogy that I used
last semester, some are called to be Generals and some enlisted men, but all have to demonstrate some growth and
advancement in their ability to control the passions and emotions that keep us from our life-task. However, I also
acknowledge that for some, those very passions and emotions may be the thing that brings them to the task. This is a fine line,
and I am not as willing as Ghandi to paint the world in such stark blacks and whites.  In the end, it may be so, for certainly I
believe that our goal is to shed this “mortal coil.”  But for now, I think it is possible that some of us may still be able to find our
own particular truths while still enjoying the taste of a good meal lovingly prepared or the mystical union of two people joined
as one.

“A man who is swayed by passions may have good enough intentions, may be truthful in word, but he will never find the Truth.
A successful search for truth means complete deliverance from the dual throng such as of love and hate, happiness and
misery” (309). See the note above.

“Human language can but imperfectly describe God’s ways.... But if mortal man will dare to describe them, he has no better
medium than his own inarticulate speech”  (387). I must admit that I am partial to human speech. It is the power of creation,
and I just don’t see that as too shabby a resume. I will often hear people say how inadequate words are, as if there were
something better. What can be better than a medium that created the world? Now, one might argue that a particular language
is inadequate, but not words, not if we knew the original language, which was taken from us at Babel. In my fantasies, I see
this as a language of music. In the meantime, if I cannot vacation in my dream retreat, I can at least use the shadow that exists
in my imagination to take me there. So too with the languages we have, for they are the shadows of the original, and they are
all we have at this time. And frankly they are enough for our child-like state. If we learn to use what we’ve got responsibly,
perhaps we will be given more of the original to work with. It is this prejudice of mine that kept me from truly enjoying a book
that is having almost as much of an impact as The Celestine Prophecies.  That book is Neil Donald Walsch’s Conversations
with God. I have several problems with it, but not the least of which is the multiple denigrations of words. So there is my
soapbox. One of many, I know.

“But you can wake a man only if he is really asleep; no effort that you may make will produce any effect upon him if he is
merely pretending sleep” (413). I love quotes that deal with analogies of sleeping and dreaming with life. Here is another one.
I’m not sure it needs much comment.

“To see the universal and all pervading Spirit of Truth face to face one must be able to love the meanest of creation as oneself.
And a man who aspires that cannot afford to keep out of any field of life.... those who say that religion has nothing to do with
politics do not know what religion means” (454). Is it possible to find spiritual politicians, or lawyers, or doctors? Of course it
is. We have no business judging someone by his or her occupation, but rather by what they do with what they’ve got. As the
old Jewish story goes – we will not be judged by whether or not we were as good as Moses, or Jesus, or Ghandi, or Mother
Theresa, but whether we were the best us that we could be.


This was an interesting book, and very revealing about Ghandi’s character. I couldn’t help wishing I could get the perspective
of his wife through all the changes he went through, but I doubt seriously whether we will ever unearth a kiss and tell diary
from her.  Ghandi was an extremist and the comparisons between he and Buber will not be easy ones, but I still think I can
come up with similarities. I will continue to work in that regard.