Next week I will be leading my Sangha on the topic of Engaged Buddhism. I recently became interested in this topic after reading Thomas Merton's version of "Gandhi: On Non-Violence." In his works, Gandhi advocated a unique blend of Christian and Hindu activism based on non-violence. I'm particularly interested in his focus on political activism. In reading, I was struck by the juxtaposition with my recent trip to the Abayaghiri Monastery. In their particular sect of Buddhism, the monks at Abayaghiri do no work. They rely entirely on the generosity of others.
How do we reconcile these viewpoints?
First, Gandhi:
II-216: "Intellectual work is important and has an undoubted place in the scheme of life. But what I insist on is the necessity of physical labor. No man, I claim, ought to be free from that obligation."
I-170: "I could not be leading a religious life unless I identified myself with the whole of mankind, and that I could not do unless I took part in politics. The gamut of man's activities today constitutes an indivisible whole. You cannot divide social, political, economic and purely religious work into watertight compartments."
In this, Gandhi is somewhat echoing the Bhagavad Gita, a work he was strongly influenced by. In there we find the concept of dharma as religious duty.
Gandhi was not, of course, a Buddhist, rather believing in the essential goodness of man and the concept of ahisma above any particular religion. And yet we do think of him as a man of peace, certainly an ascetic and a man who would regularly pray and fast.
The Tao Te Ching tells us "There is no disaster greater than not being content". "He who puts it in order will ruin it." "There may be gold and jade filling the chamber but there are none that can keep them safe".
The Buddha tells us "Desire is the root of evil, illusion is the root of evil.” He tells us "The greatest effort is not concerned with results."
There is no question that Gandhi suffered, and suffered greatly.
What would the Buddha think of Mahatma Gandhi?
