गांधीजी की धर्म-प्रतिभा
Summary
The text explores the nature of Gandhi's nonviolence (ahimsa) and its relationship to tradition. It questions whether pure ahimsa is possible in worldly life (pravritti), noting Gandhi's own admission of allowing snakes and rats to be killed in his ashram for lack of alternatives. The author distinguishes between ahimsa and anrshamsya, a concept from the Mahabharata meaning compassion and mutual regard, which encompasses both nonviolence and worldly welfare (abhyudaya). Gandhi's ahimsa is identified with anrshamsya, a dharma of pravritti rather than nivritti (renunciation). The text argues that Gandhi's religious genius lay in his creative application of dharma, which cannot be bound by fixed rules. It draws parallels between Krishna's teachings in the Mahabharata and Gandhi's approach, particularly Krishna's view that dharma's practice requires skill (kaushala) and cannot be learned from scriptures alone. The author contrasts individual dharma (ahimsa) with collective dharma (anrshamsya), noting that at the societal level, dharma traditionally accepts force (danda). Gandhi sought to eliminate this distinction. The text examines the Mahabharata's treatment of war as apaddharma (dharma in distress), where even the righteous may fight to oppose adharma. Krishna's personal choice to remain a charioteer rather than fight is highlighted as an example of svadharma. The author concludes that Gandhi's ahimsa was rooted in this tradition of anrshamsya, a dharma of engagement with the world.
Conclusion
Gandhi's reinterpretation of ahimsa as *ānṛśaṃsya*—a compassion rooted in active social engagement rather than passive withdrawal—offers a profound resolution to the ancient tension between non-violence and worldly life. By grounding his philosophy in the Mahabharata's framework of *avadh* (non-violence) and *prabhav* (collective welfare), he transforms ahimsa from an individual ascetic ideal into a viable principle for public action and statecraft. This shift implies that genuine non-violence is not about avoiding harm entirely but about cultivating a dynamic, creative response to injustice—one that requires moral courage and situational wisdom. The outcome is a practical ethics that does not retreat from conflict but confronts it through satyagraha, redefining power as moral persuasion rather than coercion. Ultimately, Gandhi’s synthesis suggests that the highest dharma lies not in rigid rules but in the compassionate, context-sensitive application of principles for the