Growth as an individual, Growth of a movement

[cattygurl]

I've been thinking about freedom, compassion, empathy and how it relates to the advancement of issues/causes.

One of the Buddhist texts speak about the important of preventing harm compared to importance of doing good. The wisdom behind the statement is that harm is more of a universal factor while "good" can often be a subjective factor, and more heavily dependent on individual circumstance, beliefs, context, etc.

I find this to be important in a sense that it allows me to look at opposing viewpoints in a more neutral position, rather than good/bad. It allows me to stay *more* objective. It allows me to stay into a neutral position and see the larger picture, and accept differences and opposing viewpoints in a less personal manner.

Buddhist text also talks about compassion and empathy free of expectation, personal agenda, or a position of superiority that often come with such actions.

Again, this allows for a more wider view of the situation, rather than looking at it through one's ego.

Buddhism strives for understanding, intention (process), and inclusiveness as a vital part of growth as a human being.

Freedom also starts with one's mind. A mind filled with anger, fear, hate, indifference, etc is not free. A mind dominated by destructive emotion, or a mind that cannot set aside personal gain and agenda will never be free. A mind that does not want freedom for all will never be free.

IMHO, I don't think a deep level of awareness can be had without these elements coming into play.

Social progress is an extention of individual growth and awareness. A social movement where the individual members do not strive for personal growth is doomed to failure.

[ryu]

Although I agree that social progress is an extension of personal growth, I believe that within our growth it is crucial to recognize and understand our emotions (such as anger/joy/etc). It is this passion for social equality and justice that brings us, the 44s, together and it is through anger that we often challange the unfortunate injustices of western world.

[cattygurl]

Although I agree that social progress is an extension of personal growth, I believe that within our growth it is crucial to recognize and understand our emotions (such as anger/joy/etc). It is this passion for social equality and justice that brings us, the 44s, together and it is through anger that we often challange the unfortunate injustices of western world.

All emotions have their place. I can have a short temper, and I often have the desire to jump up and down and scream at some people that make prejudiced comments.
Yes, anger drives us to change and anger can set the wheels for positive changes. I try to funnel my anger appropriately, instead of having my anger color my whole outlook on life. I try to come from a place of compassion and understanding, instead of remaining in a place of hate, fear and anger.

It's being able to put aside emotion after they've exhausted their constructive boundaries. It's the domination of certain emotions like hate and anger that is the problem.

Mahatma Gandhi is someone I respect greatly, and I use his example to explain my ideals.
He espoused, promoted, and practiced nonviolence.
He was able to unite warring factions- Hindus and Muslims- against oppression and for the independence of India.
He didn't stop there- instead of turning a blind eye or make excuses for racism, sexism and classism within his own community, he also tackled them, drafting the Constitution of India and abolishing the Untouchables caste (the Hijras or Daltis, are they are also known), as well as speaking out against sexism within his community. He also reserved his anger and aimed the anger appropriately- to the system of oppression, not the people. If people were pointing fingers and calling each other sellouts, the independence of India never would have occurred. Gandhi also never uttered a single word denigrating the "whites," "Muslims" (Gandhi was Hindu). His goal was for the people to see each othe on both sides of ANY fence diving them as individuals wwith the right to the same equality and freedom. His life was cut short by an Hindu Indian Assasin that felt that Gandhi was "selling out" to the Muslims.

Many people turn a blind eye to prejudice within their own community or justify racism against certain groups. We will never vanquish the SYSTEM of racism until people start fighting for the equality of ALL PEOPLE. Some people aren't interested in equality- they're only interested in gaining positions of power to continue the cycle of oppression.

[Dialectic]

This, I admit, is not entirely relevant to the central thrust of the thread, so it can probably be split later.

The Reverend Sequoyah Ade (of Native American/ Black ancestry), who we've mentioned elsewhere in this forum, has a differing opinion on Gandhi:

http://www.geocities.com/angryindian/dinesh.html

Mr. Gandhi for most of his adult life worshipped at the feet of European imperialism and often proudly proclaimed himself a loyalist to the British Empire. The revered holy man it seemed never really altered his position given his firsthand experience with the Boer system of racism as a young lawyer in South Africa because in 1903 he penned in an submission to the South African publication Indian Review: ìAbout this mixing of the Kaffirs with the Indians I must confess I feel most strongly. I think it is very unfair to the Indian population, and it is an undue tax on even the proverbial patience of my countrymenî.

Now this position may be a little extreme, and I certainly would not agree with Ade's first sentence, as navigating social, economic, and political systems is very complex and dangerous for well-known advocates, so we cannot really judge the motives behind Gandhi's statements of loyalty. Certainly, however, the phrase Ade quotes from the Indian Review is one for concern. Ade is, incidentally, a Theravadin Buddhist.

[Dialectic]

Of course, then he says stuff like this, so hey:

http://www.raceandhistory.com/cgi-bin/forum/webbbs_config.pl/noframes/read/1409

(ii) " England has got successful competitors in America, Japan, France, Germany. It has competitors in the handful of mills in India, and as there has been an awakening in India, even so there will be an awakening in South Africa with its vastly richer resources -- natural , mineral and human. The mighty English look quite pigmies before the mighty races of Africa. They are noble savages after all, you will say. They are certainly noble, but no savages and in the course of a few years the Western nations may cease to find in Africa a dumping ground for their wares."

Gandhi, speaking at Oxford, October 24, 1931 (CWMG , Volume 48, p.225).

[cattygurl]

I've actually done extensive research on Gandhi. Yes, he's human and he's had some human foibles (i.e. he did get a big head after a while, in some respects). We all do. I think his views of sexuality is somewhat stunted. He's human and I accept him as an imperfect being that was a great leader with an extraordinary mind for progress considering the mentality of his times. It's one thing to be born in times of awareness and be aware- it's another thing to completely think outside the box of socially accepted norms towards progress. The words of people like Thomas Jefferson, Thoreau and Emerson are made even greater considering the fact that they were a rare gem of progress, not because their mode of thinking was the norm. It takes a lot more to be a pioneer.

As for Gandhi, he didn't start his activism until after 1903. He didn't lead his first nonviolent protest in Johannesburg until 1906. He didn't return to India until 1914- when he was 45 years old. Just as any human has evolution and progress, he's surely had his line of progress and evolution. He wasn't born the great Mahatma at birth. He isn't the perfect son of god. He was an ordinary man with human faults with an extraordinary mind that was able to bring great awareness and progress.

The fact remains that he has been one of the key figures in Indian independence, and that he did speak out for a lot of positive changes and ideals.

[cattygurl]

In 1932, Gandhi begins a ìfast unto deathî to protest the British government's treatment of India's lowest caste ìuntouchablesî whom Gandhi calls HarijansóîGod's children.î Gandhi's campaign of civil disobedience has brought rioting and has landed him in prison, but he persists in his demands for social reform, he urges a new boycott of British goods, and after 6 days of fasting obtains a pact that improves the status of the ìuntouchablesî (from one of my biographies).

Considering the discrimination that the Harijans STILL face in India TODAY, this was an act of serious defiance to most Indians and Hindus (which he was himself) as well as the British. For a man in the 1930's speak out against racism, classism, prejudice, sexism and the whole fucking 9 yards was extremely unusual.