To understand the origins of satyagraha, it is vital to remember the personal life-journey of Gandhi. His search for truth was rooted in him from his early childhood. School days marked the beginnings of ‘experiments’ with meat-eating and smoking which in turn led to ‘stealing.’ His courage to confess his wrongs to his father and the willingness to undergo reparation manifest a desire to hold to truth at any cost. The classical incident at the school where he did not oblige his teacher to copy from his companion’s slate in order to deceive the school inspector, reflects another incident of ‘a resolute desire to follow’ one’s own path. The story of Harischandra captured his heart and confirmed his desire to be truthful. The repetition of Ramanama as a remedy against all fears became a practice from early childhood.1 

The Original Africans. The original inhabitants of South Africa were Negroes of various tribes like the Zulus, the Swazis, the Basutos, the Bachuanas, etc. In the early part of this century, the Negroes amounted to five million and the Europeans around one million and a quarter. The Dutch were the first Europeans to arrive in South Africa. From the early decades of white settlement in the middle of the 17th century, the white Dutch settlers maintained a white aristocracy in South Africa in which all whites - irrespective of origin, religion and accomplishment, were entitled to settle and from which all non-whites were virtually excluded.2 The Dutch erected a sort of ‘caste system’ based on color, considering all ‘hardwork’ as ‘kaffir work’ and socially degrading, creating ‘black servants’ and ‘white masters.’ The white Dutch were known as the Boers or the Afrikaners.

From the early years, the Boers kept themselves away from Europe and sought to establish Afrikaner nationhood. However they retained from Europe their Calvinist religion which was more of the Old than of the New Testament. The Transvaal Constitution declared that "the people are determined to permit no equality between white and black, in Church or State."3 

The Arrival of the Indians. The unwillingness of the natives to work in the tea, coffee and sugar plantations, and the dislike of the white aristocracy for hard labor occasioned the arrival of the ‘indentured laborers’ from India, on request from the British Africans to the British Government in India. Thus, the first Indians, in Gandhi’s reckoning, came on November 16, 1860. Gandhi held that the supply of the indentured laborers by the British to their fellowmen in South Africa is a partial and indirect form of semi-slavery.4 Another group of Indians arrived 15 years later from Mauritius as traders. They were originally Porbandar Muslims. Hindus came directly from India as ‘passengers,’ with substantial capital for trade following them. Thus there were two classes of Indians in South Africa; free traders and their clerks, and the indentured and ex-indentured laborers. Some of the indentured laborers who sought to stay in South Africa did not enjoy the full rights of free Indians. They had to pay special taxes, carry special passes and follow marriage restrictions, etc. The traders moved about freely and conducted business with the Negroes, the Indians and the Boers. They spread themselves in small pockets through the four colonies.

The Indians, at the time of Gandhi, amounted to 50,000 free Indians and 100,000 so called non-free Indians, composed of the indentured laborers. The indentured laborers were called ‘coolies’ and the traders and lawyers came to be known as ‘coolie traders and lawyers.’5 The four main colonies of South Africa were Natal with its port at Durban and its capital at Pietermaritzburg; Transvaal, (including the gold mine city of Johannesberg) with its capital at Pretoria; the Orange Free State with its capital at Bloemfontein; and Cape Colony with its capital at Cape Town and a large port at the Cape of Good Hope. Besides these four principal colonies, there were other territories under British protection.

The European planters were in need of ‘Indian labor’ for their plantations, but they did not want them to settle in South Africa after their term of labor. The indentured laborers were offered a five-year term of indenture and five years of free labor with a free pass back to India. Until 1890, an ex-indenture had the choice of exchanging his return passage for a plot of land. Due to the unfavorable conditions at home and due to the availability of labor in Natal, about 52 percent of the migrants remained in the colony after their term had expired.6 Thus they formed a permanent group of ex-indentured laborers and their descendants. The whites started an agitation demanding an obligatory return of the Indians on the expiration of the term. In order to effect this policy the colonial governments introduced a heavy annual capitation tax on the laborers who did not re-indenture themselves. When Natal obtained a responsible government in 1893, it imposed a tax amounting to six months’ earnings of an indentured person. There was also an agitation against the Indian traders, pressuring the government of Natal to defranchise all Asians except those who were already on the voter list. The Transvaal eventually passed a law that required every Indian to register himself at the cost of three pounds. Indians were then segregated and sent to a dirty, remote locality assigned to them by the Government. In the Orange Free State, Indian trading was forbidden and the traders were forced to work as laborers. Cape Town remained comparatively peaceful, although the Immigration Restriction Act and the Dealers’ License Act were in force in the Cape colony, as well.7 

Gandhi arrived on the scene in 1893 as a lawyer, invited by a merchant who wished to settle his dispute with another merchant. According to Gandhi’s version, at that time there was hardly any educated Indian who could represent the Indian cause. However, Maureen Shaw in her study has claimed that there had been a preliminary political association and representations made by the members of a ‘privileged strata’ of the Indian community prior to the arrival of Gandhi.8 Gandhi’s own submission can be sustained because the merchants relied mainly on hired British lawyers for drawing up their petitions and cases. What is important to recognize is that there had been some sort of political awakening, even if for vested economic interests, among the merchants before Gandhi appeared on the scene.

Between his arrival in 1893 and his direct public involvement in the South African Indian issue in 1894, one notices that Gandhi was not confined to any private work for his employer. His experience of racial prejudice on trains opened his eyes to the hardships of the Indians in South Africa. His own religious quest continued with the increasing contacts with the Christians and his dialogue with Raichandbhai, his religious mentor in India and during this time, Tolstoy’s Kingdom of God within You challenged his personal, social and economic outlook.9 Gandhi condensed these early experiences in these words: "Suffice to say, that all these experiences sank in me. I had gone there only for a single case prompted by self-interest and curiosity. During the first year, therefore, I was merely the witness and the victim of these wrongs. I then woke to a sense of duty."10 

In 1894, the Natal Government introduced a bill to amend the Asiatic Franchise. The Indian community decided to protest and Gandhi decided to stay back in South Africa instead of returning to India. There were three major components in the first phase of the protest that spread over the next two years; the formation of the Natal Indian Congress, the publication of a pamphlet on the ‘Indian Franchise’ appealing to every Briton in South Africa, and a mass petition to the Viceroy. Regarding the formation of the Natal Indian Congress, Swan is critical of its elitist nature and interest in protecting the economic interest of the wealthy Gujarati merchant class. However one should not read too much into this criticism as we know that there were more than 10,000 signatories to this appeal to the Viceroy of India. The pamphlet directly appealed to every Briton to support them in their fight for full rights as citizens of the British Empire. Noteworthy at this stage of the evolution of the pedagogy of satyagraha is the attempt of the Congress to involve the people in the struggle and to undertake sanitation work among the poorer sections. They educated the masses regarding the truthfulness of their protest and cautioned them not to exaggerate their demands or to disrespect the opponents.11 Eventually, London disallowed the defranchising Bill. On his return to India, Gandhi continued to educate the Indian public on the South African cause and elicited support from various agencies through the columns of the newspapers.

Cooperating with the Opponent. An interesting turn of events took place in the development of satyagraha. As war broke out between the English and the Boers in the Transvaal, Gandhi urged his people to help Britain in the war. His rationale was that all the while they had been fighting for the rights of British citizenship. Truthfulness is the essential ingredient of satyagraha. That one should appear to be as one really is and should act accordingly is not the last, but the first step to practical religion.12 Though their appeal was initially refused, and they knew that they would be treated as coolies, the Ambulance Corps of 1100 Indians of all creeds and classes was formed. According to Gandhi, the war services taught them not to despise anyone, however insignificant he may be and that every human being is capable of the loftiest heroism.

The Transvaal Government introduced the Indentured Labor Draft Ordinance (1904) and the Asiatic Law Amendment Ordinance (1906) restricting the movements of indentured laborers and insisting that they carry their identity card everywhere. The Indian opinion was that it was virtual slavery. It is significant to note that in this phase of the struggle, the merchant class was rather disinterested in the struggle, as the philosophy of the struggle went beyond their class interests and required more ‘personal transformation.’ However Swan attributes this apathy to the lack of political mechanism for active participation in the British Indian Association and the absence of a strategy capable of effecting political mobilization among the masses.13 While these reasons could well be present, the real issue was the struggle and search in Gandhi to find an adequate way of protest that would integrate the larger moral and political insights which were emerging as part of satyagraha. In fact, Swan himself acknowledges this when he quotes Gandhi to affirm that the active pursuit of truth through moral autonomy, manifested in service to community (suffering for one’s convictions), offers equilibrium, self-respect and self-realization.14 

The rationale of the protest against the unjust moves of the Government had to be explained to the people; they had to be mobilized towards a protest and to act effectively. Through pamphlets and meetings, people were educated that the Government’s move was inhuman and an insult to their self-respect. Secondly, Gandhi appealed to their conscience and asked them to take a personal voluntary oath against the Government’s ordinances, with readiness to suffer for the act. God is invoked as witness and as support.15 The appeal to their religious faith in order to mobilize both the Hindus and the Muslims is understood in Gandhian terms as ‘faith influencing the entire spectrum of life.’ Faith should have social implications, and this struggle is part of a ‘religious quest and realization.’ As the protests were not effective enough to impress London, a delegation was sent to England and it yielded fruit. The Crown disallowed the ordinance, but assured the Transvaal Government that they were free to introduce the ordinance once they were given self-government. The Transvaal Government eventually enacted the ordinance, severely affecting the life and freedom of the Indians there. As the protest grew stronger, another bill (Immigrants Restriction Act) was introduced (1907). The movement, then known as ‘Passive Resistance Association,’ decided not to obey the law and not to register themselves as it was "degrading to their humanness and offensive to their religion, and such defiance of the law was in obedience to the law of God."16 At this stage Gandhi insisted upon avoiding any secrecy and cunningness. All these led to Gandhi’s arrest. But the refusal to register gained momentum. Thus, at the formative level of satyagraha, all means of protest were employed, mobilization was effected through religious faith, and action was taken with voluntary consent and a willingness to suffer.

In English, the passive resistance referred to the resistance offered against a law by a minority who was weak, few in number and who had no hope of succeeding with the use of arms. The typical example was the Women Suffragist Movement in Britain. Satyagraha, on the contrary, stood neither for the weak nor did it reflect the minority. "Satyagraha is the soul force pure and simple, and wherever and to whatever extent there is room for the use of arms, physical or brute force, there and to that extent is there so much less possibility for soul force. These are purely antagonistic forces in my view, and I had full realization of this antagonism even at the time of the advent of satyagraha."17 Explaining further the difference of satyagraha from passive resistance, Gandhi said: "Satyagraha postulates the conquest of the adversary by suffering in one’s own person."18 The passive resisters claimed Jesus Christ as their prince; to which Gandhi added: "Jesus Christ, indeed, has been acclaimed the prince of passive resisters, but I submit in that case passive resistance must mean satyagraha and satyagraha alone."19 

I have received West’s telegram about your illness. I feel heart-broken, but I cannot come to look after you. I have sacrificed all in the satyagraha struggle. . . . I love you so much that even if you are dead, you will always be alive in me. I repeat what I have told you that I shall never marry again. You should depart with faith in God. . . . My struggle is not merely political; it is also a righteous struggle and is, therefore, entirely pure.20 

 

Eventually, a settlement was reached between Gandhi and General Smuts (January, 1908) whereby it was agreed that the Indians would voluntarily re-register themselves and that the Government would repeal the ‘Black Act’. To allay the fears that General Smuts might not keep his word, Gandhi wrote: "A satyagrahi bids goodbye to fear. He is therefore never afraid of trusting the opponent. Even if the opponent plays him false twenty times, the satyagrahi is ready to trust him for the twenty-first time, for an implicit trust in human nature is the very essence of his creed."21 

Conflict followed. During a public gathering, one of the Pathans swore with Allah as witness to kill the person who would take the lead to register, as he felt that Gandhi had betrayed the Indian community. Gandhi challenged him and offered to be the first one to register. On 10th February, 1908 while on his way to the Registration Office, the same Pathan attacked Gandhi and he fell. Gandhi refused to prosecute the assailant; instead he prayed that the blood shed that day might cement the two communities of the Muslims and the Hindus. Reverend Doke’s daughter sang for him ‘Lead Kindly Light.’ Once he recovered, Gandhi undertook writing a series of articles on Socrates, illustrating his life of witness to truth to the end. Further on, elaborating on the philosophy of Socrates and Ruskin, Gandhi formulated his theory of sarvodaya.22 This was a period of intense struggle, at the personal and social levels, to shape an integral method of ‘conflict resolution’. Satyagraha was inching forward, in and through various experiments towards such a pedagogy.

As feared, the Government did not respect the terms of the agreement; on the other hand it carried through the legislation validating the Asiatic Registration Act. There followed a direct path of confrontation. Registration certificates were burnt, Gandhi along with many more were arrested, many crossed the Transvaal border without certificates in protest and the Government resorted to forceful deportation. Another delegation to London did not yield much result. The arrests, deportation, and other harassment disheartened satyagrahis.23 

As far as Gandhi was concerned, the London trip helped him in many ways. He met with the anarchists in London who were working for India’s freedom and exchanged his own perspectives with them. He renewed his correspondence with Tolstoy, and to further advance the cause of ‘passive resistance,’ he read Edward Carpenter’s Civilizations: Its Cause and Curse, and was reconfirmed in his resolution in the strength of the soul-force.24 The net result of these contracts and reflections was Hind Swaraj, a booklet on his philosophy of ‘self-rule and culture’ against the spirit of modern civilization. Tolstoy’s reply to Gandhi evidences the support that the latter received: "That same struggle (as in the Transvaal) of the tender against the harsh, of meekness and love against pride and violence, is every year making itself more and more felt among us also."25 

Tolstoy farm which Gandhi established with the generous support of Hermann Kallenbach (1910), would gradually become the center of schooling in satyagraha (in Transvaal) with self-reliance (all work done by the members), self-sacrifice, tolerance, appreciation of nature and religious prayer as the features of its life. All along, Gandhi insisted on the rationale of satyagraha as seeking first the kingdom of God and his righteousness and said that "if through this struggle, we learn better to depend on Him (God) alone, that is sufficient gain in itself, and all else will follow as a matter of course."26 

According to Gandhi, the ingredient for the final satyagraha was prepared by God in the form of a judgement by the Supreme Court in Cape Colony to the effect that all marriages, excepting the Christian and registered ones, were outside the pale of legal marriage.27 This automatically made null and void all marriages of the Hindus, the Muslims and the Zoroastrians. The satyagraha movement resumed on the three key issues: the removal of the annual tax on the indentured laborers; the amendment of the Marriage Law of the union and the removal of the color bar in the Immigration Act.28 Phoenix farm in the Natal province and the Tolstoy farm in the Transvaal became nerve centers of the satyagraha struggle. The satyagrahis decided to cross the borders without registration. Hundreds of people, including women and children, trekked their way (October, 1913) with courage and determination across the border to go to the Tolstoy farm, thereby courting arrest. Their intention was not to seek domicile in the Transvall by crossing over from Natal, but only to demonstrate against the loss of self-respect. All along the march, the government authorities were contacted with a desire to negotiate. It was of no avail. It is to be noted that Gandhi’s leadership was questioned more than once during this phase of the struggle.29 However Gandhi survived these challenges.

Gandhi was arrested and released several times during this march. The government resorted to repression. There was by then a mass agitation in India supporting the cause of the Indians in South Africa.30 Meanwhile the European employees of the Union Railways decided to strike at this opportunity to pressure the government for these demands. At this juncture, instead of harassing the government by continued marches and agitations, Gandhi postponed the struggle until the railway strike was over. This marked the qualitative difference for the satyagraha struggle from all other opportunistic struggles. As one of the secretaries of General Smuts remarked: "I often wish you took to violence like in English strikes, and then we would know at once how to dispose of you. But you will not injure even the enemy. You desire victory by self-suffering alone and never transgress your self-imposed limits of courtesy and chivalry. And that is what reduces us to sheer helplessness."31 Meanwhile a commission of inquiry was instituted which was rejected by Gandhi on the grounds that there was no Indian representation in it and that the arrested laborers were not released. After protracted meetings with General Smuts, a provisional agreement was reached and satyagraha was suspended. Many Indians, recalling the fiasco in 1908, were reluctant to endorse the agreement as they suspected the intentions of General Smuts. Gandhi’s response enunciates the inner logic of satyagraha that is so different from other means of conflict resolution.

No matter how often a satyagraha is betrayed, he will repose his trust in the adversary so long as there are not cogent grounds for mistrust. Pain to a satyagrahi is the same as pleasure. He will not therefore be misled by the mere fear of suffering into groundless distrust.32 

Our age is characterized by impermanence and provisionality. We find it difficult to stay with anything, and be really alive and passionate about anything, day after day, week by week, year by year. Diversion is what is constant. We move on when there are no immediate results. We resist going back to the book every single day, listening long and lovingly to that Word beneath and beyond all the words, staying with it long enough to hear the beating of the heart of God beneath and beyond the cacophony and clutter of our own making, staying still long enough to find ourselves in God and there to rest even and especially when such staying does not ‘work for me?’ or ‘do’ any good whatsoever.33

 

Gandhi was an expert at symbolism, and my father (Martin Luther King) became an apt pupil. Like Gandhi, my father knew that human compassion is universal. A single act of one could quickly ignite the action of many if it appealed to what is just and right within the human spirit. Upon reaching the Arabian Sea, Gandhi waded into the water and picked up a handful of salt, an unlawful act. This act of civil disobedience - one frail hand ‘mining’ salt - sparked the revolution for freedom from British rule in India. . . . The tactics of Gandhi and King are as viable today as they were when these great men walked our midst.34

 

Of late, Ken Wilber has been arguing for an integral approach to human life. The various sciences and philosophies, according to him, should lead to a certain orientating perspective that would assist humans to achieve higher consciousness.35 Gandhi’s pedagogy of relying on soul-force anticipated such a perspective and confirmed the best of Indian traditions and the core of the Sermon on the Mount.

Both at the initial stages of satyagraha and all through his life, Gandhi has been accused of being an utopian visionary. Gandhi has taken pains to defend the ‘experimental nature’ of his endeavors. However, one needs to emphasize the epistemological value of utopias. Utopias help in giving a frame of reference to thinking and acting. Utopian thought is a dynamic element in the historical becoming of humanity. It has the quality of being subversive to and a driving force of history. It is the imaginative dimension of politics.36 The utopian dimension of satyagraha is not its weakness; rather it emboldens humans to work for a new and creative order in life. As we move into the third millennium, it will not be a mistake to envision a world that is more humane.