Posts Tagged ‘coward’
All my life I believed that the right always triumphs. Things happened to me; things that said differently; things that shattered my belief, but I retained. I felt humiliation but I never let my belief go.
Then I thought I am righteous; today I doubt – was I upright or a coward?
There is a small difference between the two.
Cowardice is ‘lack of courage’ and a coward is a timid man – hence he keeps from action. Righteousness is ‘according to moral principles’ and righteous is a moral man – henceforth he refrains from action out of his morality. Both slip into inaction – the difference lies in their reasons – one is scared to act, because he might get hurt – another, because to act is immoral. Dread of scar is okay – it’s physical therefore immediate and visible – but what about morality? How do we define that something is immoral, or something is moral?
Gandhi talked of non-violence – “thou must not hurt others.” India could have won her freedom much earlier had he not withdrawn ‘non-co-operation’ movement in the wake of blazing chaura-chauri police station. Was it moral? During partition when Pakistan government was denied of earlier promised 55 crores, he sat on fast-till-end. Was that moral? Nathuram Godse killed him – in almost the similar way Bhagat Singh threw bombs in parliament – but was treated discriminately. Was that moral?
I dare to ask: what is moral? Who defines it?
Can I not say that Gandhi was a coward – if only we change our perception of morality? Why do I present myself to my perpetrators? Why on earth should I even try to change his heart, that too, at the cost of my own life, my body, physical sufferings, and my self dignity? If someone rapes my sister what would I do? Would I go and kill him, or would I go and ask him to rape her again – because this might change the rapist’s brain as Gandhi said. Or would I simply mourn at home and pray to god for not to repeat such a torment again, like a typical coward? Had Gandhi been alive today, and Pakistan attacked on us, would we have presented our country to them, hoping that this would change their hearts and they would return our land?
Gandhi could not fight back in the train from which he was thrown out in South Africa, that is why, he took up non-violence. And later he defined it moral. And people believed him.
Had it not been to Gandhi, India would have become free much earlier, and today, it would become much better. Merely because Gandhi couldn’t fight back the abuses spewed upon him, we are suffering today.
Few people who understand this assume power and then try to subjugate us, and we, like moral, upright men, submit ourselves. But for how long? How many more times, how many more days would this go like this? Are we really devoid of all dignity? Then, why do we still idolize Shivaji, Tipu Sultan, Mangal Pandey and many like of their ilk? Forget them, of forget Gandhi.
Every man has a right to live, but not at the expense of other’s life. You can’t sacrifice your life to change someone’s brain or heart.
This world is a fucking place, where nothing but power speaks. You don’t believe it…eh? You think that Gandhi did everything on his principle of non-violence? No. This principle only helped him to shed his failures, and hence generated a great support from the masses – which actually was his power. Gandhi took almost five decades in freeing India; Babar took only few years to conquer India. Who was mightier?
This is a man’s world – a brawny competitive world.
Take it or leave it or simply ignore it.