Page 116 - Acharya Vinoba Bhave in 21st Century ISBN

21oha “krkCnh esa vkpk;Z fouksck Hkkos dh izklafxdrk

non-violence vehemently. We would face stiff opposition. Those who are our friends, and whose
30
friendship we desire, would then no longer be our friends.” To the villagers of a village, who had
resolved to make their village self-sufficient, he pointed out, “When you take the Name of Lord Rama,
the resolve to stand up against the demons is implicit in it. You say that you would look after your

affairs. But there are people who want to look after your affairs. So, a struggle becomes inevitable.” 31
He told Sarva Seva Sangh after the declaration of Bihar-dan(October 1969) that satyagraha could

be undertaken to remove obstacles in post-Gramdan work. 32
The struggle against the State and the vested interests was bound to be protracted and Vinoba

knew it. Critics have repeated ad nauseam that Vinoba avoided confrontational satyagraha, overlooking
these facts. This criticism, to say the least, betrays ignorance about Vinoba’s mind as well as about the

working of non-violence. Non-violence decrees that the way of love and compassion should first be
tried with faith and perseverance. That was what Vinoba did. When Socialist leader Ram Manohar

Lohia, who considered himself Gandhi’s genuine heir, wrote to him (15 April 1952) that conversion of
hearts, like social transformation, has a limit and recourse would have to be taken to law or satyagraha,

Vinoba readily conceded that rationally, conversion of hearts might have a limit,”but as long as that limit
has not been reached, why should I let that fact affect my heart? Why shouldn’t I believe that the Lord

who has convinced me about a particular thing would convince others as well? I am nursing my sick
father. Shouldn’t I nurse him with the hope that he would recover, although rationally I may accept the

possibility that my efforts may be of no avail or may only be partially successful?” 33
Bhoodan seemed improbable when it was started. Now when a personality like Vinoba isnot

around, it is impossible to think of it. Although much needs to be done to ensure that benefits of
Bhoodan reach the target group to the maximum possible extent and it gets the place it deserves in the

academic discourse, Bhoodan, it has to be conceded, will not work today. But the land problem
persists, although in a different form, and the challenge to find a non-violent solution is as alive as it was

when Vinoba took up the problem.
Even as the process of disintegration of villages is in full swing, the realisation that itwould

destroy the country, both materially and spiritually, is also growing. It is also being increasingly realised
that unity of the village community taking decisions by consensus is the best guarantee for ending

exploitation and inequalities. Modern civilisation has brought the world to the brink of disaster, and
human being stands alone—debilitated, alienated, manipulated, confused. He needs the warmth of the

community. Gramdan has therefore become even more relevant than it appeared in the past. That
Mendha (Lekha), a village in Gadchiroli district of Maharashtra, has recently embraced Gramdan by

consensus through thorough study, after getting convinced that Gramdan would help accelerate its
journey towards swaraj (self-rule), is a ray of hope. The concepts of Bhoodan and Gramdan and

116