th a similar prayer.
After much thinking I have arrived at a definition of Swadeshi that,
perhaps, best illustrates my meaning. Swadeshi is that spirit in us
which restricts us to the use and service of our immediate surroundings
to the exclusion of the more remote. Thus, as for religion, in order to
satisfy the requirements of the definition, I must restrict myself to my
ancestral religion. That is the use of my immediate religious
surrounding. If I find it defective, I should serve it by purging it of
its defects. In the domain of politics I should make use of the
indigenous institutions and serve them by curing them of their proved
defects. In that of economics I should use only things that are produced
by my immediate neighbours and serve those industries by making them
efficient and complete where they might be found wanting. It is
suggested that such Swadeshi, if reduced to practice, will lead to the
millennium. And, as we do not abandon our pursuit after the millennium,
because we do not expect quite to reach it within our times, so may we
not abandon Swadeshi even though it may not be fully attained for
generations to come.
Let us briefly examine the three branches of Swadeshi as sketched above.
Hinduism has become a conservative religion and, therefore, a mighty
force because of the Swadeshi spirit underlying it. It is the most
tolerant because it is non-proselytising, and it is as capable of
expansion today as it has been found to be in the past. It has succeeded
not in driving out, as I think it has been erroneously held, but in
absorbing Buddhism. By reason of the Swadeshi spirit, a Hindu refuses to
change his religion, not necessarily because he considers it to be the
best, but because he knows that he can complement it by introducing
reforms. And what I have said about Hinduism is, I suppose, true of the
other great faiths of the world, only it is held that it is specially so
in the case of Hinduism. But here comes the point I am labouring to
reach. If there is any substance in what I have said, will not the great
missionary bodies of India, to whom she owes a deep debt of gratitude
for what they have done and are doing, do still better and serve the
spirit of Christianity better by dropping the goal of proselytising
while continuing their philanthropic work? I hope you will not consider
this to be an impertinence on my part. I make the suggestion in all
sincerity and with due humility. Moreover I have
|