Hinduism
Arun Gandhi
12:00
Arun Gandhi
Arun Gandhi is a social rights campaigner who has followed in the footsteps of his
grandfather Mahatma Gandhi by using peaceful, non-violent methods to raise
awareness of inequalities around the world.
Although he regards himself as a Hindu, he shares the belief of his grandfather who
said:
Religion is like climbing a mountain. Ultimately, we are all going to the same
peak, so why should it matter which side we are going up? (Mohandas
Karamchand (Mahatma) Gandhi)
Background
Arun Gandhi was born in South Africa during the time of apartheid. Early in his life,
Arun experienced prejudice from white South Africans for being too black and by black
South Africans for being too white. Arun’s father was editor of a publication called
‘Indian Opinion’ and actively campaigned against unjust apartheid laws in South Africa
and was imprisoned for being involved in protests. He was also imprisoned in India for
his role in demanding independence.
A significant influence on the life and beliefs of Arun Gandhi was his paternal
grandfather, Mohandas Karamchand (Mahatma) Gandhi. Arun lived with and was
taught by his grandfather for a period between 1946-48. This was a difficult and
important time in the history of India, during which Arun witnessed the campaign for
liberation, hearing and seeing firsthand his grandfather’s philosophy of nonviolence in
action. This period has had a pronounced influence on Arun Gandhi, as he stated:
When I lived with Grandfather between the ages of twelve and fourteen, he
taught me to ask myself every day, in fact at every moment, if what I was
contemplating to do would help or hinder other human beings. If the honest
answer was that it would harm others, then I was committing an act of violence.
(One God, Many Images)
Family
Arun’s father, Manilal Gandhi was the second of the four sons of Mohandas and
Kasturba Gandhi. Manilal worked in Durban for Indian Opinion, a Gujarati-English
weekly publication, becoming editor in 1920. He married Arun’s mother, Sushila
Mashruwala, in 1927 and Arun was born in 1934.
When Manilal died in 1956, Arun travelled to India to place his father’s ashes in the
River Ganges. During the trip he fell ill with appendicitis and required surgery. Whilst in
hospital he met a nurse named Sunanda Ambegaonkar and a relationship developed.
They married in India in 1957.
Beliefs
Arun is a Hindu who holds universalist principles and is devoted to the promotion of
the philosophy of Sarvodaya (welfare for all people) advocated by his grandfather.
Life work
Arun Gandhi is a journalist, author, speaker and leader in the promotion of
nonviolence and healing of communities and society. With his wife, Arun spent over 30
years working to alleviate suffering and combat the conditions leading to poverty for
people in India. He worked as a journalist for The Times of India for over 30 years.
Now he continues to campaign, teach and write in an effort to create a better world
and better life conditions for all people. His religious and philosophical beliefs and
values have impacted significantly on the course of his life in both his actions and his
words. It has been stated that Arun’s mission in life is to continue the work of his
grandfather, in bringing a peaceful and nonviolent model of life to the world.
Some key aspects of the work of Arun Gandhi:

World renowned, international speaker and teacher on nonviolence and social
change

Author of several books, papers and regular blogger for the Washington Post

Foundation of the MK Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence

Foundation of the Gandhi Worldwide Education Institute

more information on the life and works of Arun Gandhi can be found in his
website Total Nonviolence.
Thoughts on Hinduism and religion
Arun believes that while he was born a Hindu and that he is a Hindu, there is no
exclusive religion that leads to a God. Rather, he aligns with the belief of his
grandfather who said:
Religion is like climbing a mountain. Ultimately, we are all going to the same
peak, so why should it matter which side we are going up? (Honolulu
Advertiser)
Arun has been quoted as stating that for him worship is either quietly practiced at
home, or is public in a universalist way for anyone to join in.
Arun’s grandfather experienced negative conduct by missionaries of other world
religions attempting to convert Hindus in India. This led Gandhi to dislike them and
their religions. Indeed, he once said that if Christian missionaries stopped talking about
Christianity and started to live it they might see a far greater conversion rate. However,
his parents were tolerant and taught Gandhi to respect the beliefs of others. He grew
to understand that friendly dialogue and a healthy respect for the beliefs of others
would help to bring about a more peaceful existence. Gandhi explained:
A friendly study of all the scriptures is the sacred duty of every individual. (One
God, Many Images)
In response to his beliefs, Gandhi conducted open prayer and worship, without any
religious symbols but with hymns from all, that allowed followers of all religions to take
part and this is something he continues to value. He has argued that:
If a religion does not teach and promote respect, love, understanding, and
acceptance of each other and each other’s faith, then it cannot be a worthy
religion; for no God can profess or promote hate, prejudice, discrimination, or
violence. (One God, Many Images)
In following in the belief of his grandfather, Arun has discussed the concept of living
one’s religion, rather than simply talking about it. He has explained:
True spirituality involves infusing one’s beliefs and attitudes into relationships
with others. Religion has been reduced to mere rituals. We think that just
practicing particular ceremonies, saying certain prayers or incantations, is all it
takes to bring us blessings in life. But this is not true. They are meaningless
words unless people behave in ways that are consistent with their espoused
beliefs. (Living Nonviolence).
Arun believes in the concepts his Grandfather held of salvation existing in the service
of others. Mohandas Gandhi believed that salvation existed in wiping away the tears of
those who suffered and in bringing decency and humanity to those who needed help.
Thus, there are many ways to salvation as there are many ways to help and serve
others.
Arun would argue that we can see this example of the sacrificial life in the examples
set by the key figures in the world religions, such as Siddartha Guatama, Krishna,
Jesus and Muhammad. He explains:
The common thread that runs through the lives of all of God’s messengers is
Love, Compassion, Understanding, Commitment and Respect for all living
creatures. Each one of them demonstrated these qualities through their work
and their lives. It must, therefore, be assumed they were demonstrating to us
humans the way our Creator expects us to live. (God Without Religion)
Arun believes that we cannot own knowledge and truth of God, we can only pursue
these. Therefore, he would claim, Hindus must accept any image of God, given that
one cannot claim to know the ‘true’ image of God. Thus, he may be considered a
Hindu and a universalist. Arun has argued that this type of understanding is required if
we are to live in peace and develop a nonviolent society where all religions are
respected.
Respect for all religions will come only when we make concerted attempts to
replace the present culture of violence with a more inclusive and positive culture
of nonviolence. (One God, Many Images)
In more than one discussion, Arun has recalled a specific encounter that he considers
important in highlighting the negative aspects of competitive religion and the necessity
of a more inclusive understanding.
I recall a painfully sad episode that took place a few years ago when I was
invited to explain the Hindu way of life to Christian students of comparative
religion. Also invited were Muslim and Jewish priests. After my talk the Muslim
priest prefaced his talk with the remarks which were clearly addressed to me.
“We Christians, Muslims and Jews,” he said, “have something in common. We
not only have a common source but we are a ‘book religion’ unlike you who are
pagan.” The implication was clear. He believed that the Muslim, Christian and
Jewish word of God came to them in the form of a book whereas for the Hindus
the scriptures were orally transmitted. Thus, he concluded that Hindus believe
in 50,000 Gods whereas the western family of religions believed only in one.
This is a common misconception in the West. An ancient philosopher once said
the easiest way to kill a philosophy is by writing a book. Then it becomes a
dogma and ceases to be a vibrant, living philosophy.
As for believing in 50,000 or more Gods, I said, the Hindu belief is not that there
are so many Gods (in fact many of us believe there are as many Gods as there
are human beings) but that there are many images of God. It is this openness in
Hinduism, the admission that no one really knows the true image of God that
leads to the belief that human beings can only “pursue” the Truth and not
“possess” it as the western family of religions believe. Pursuit implies humility,
acceptance, openness and appreciation while possession implies arrogance,
closed minds and lack of appreciation. Herein lies the rub. If we persist in
pursuing competition instead of working in unity to pursue the Truth we are
going to face untold grief and worse, violence.
(God Without Religion)
Arun has quoted his grandfather on his key belief regarding God:
I do dimly perceive that whilst everything around me is ever-changing, ever-dying,
there is underlying all that change a Living Power that is changeless, that holds all
together, that creates, dissolves and re-creates. That informing Power or Spirit is
God…. For I can see that in the midst of death life persists; in the midst of untruth truth
persists; in the midst of darkness light persists. Hence I gather that God is Life, Truth,
Light. God is Love. God is the Supreme Good. (God Without Religion)
For more detail on Arun’s thoughts on religion, see his paper on the website of The
Network of Spiritual Progressives, entitled One God, Many Images.
And his own paper (God Without Religion).
Thoughts on nonviolence
Arun Gandhi is an advocate of nonviolence. This emanates from the philosophy of his
Grandfather, Mohandas K. Gandhi. Arun would argue that nonviolence should not be
understood (as has been the case by some philosophers) as the opposite of violence,
where it is written as “non-violence”. This understanding would be that it is simply a
counter to the anger, hurt and dehumanisation of violence. Rather, he would claim,
..to practice nonviolence one has to be dominated by positive emotions and
attitudes like love, understanding, respect, compassion and so on. It is only
when we learn to respect people as human beings that we will be able to truly
practice nonviolence. We cannot and should not be selective in whom we
respect, it has to be unconditional and all pervasive. (The Relevance of Gandhi
Today)
Arun believes that humanity has worked for peace throughout history, yet has failed.
This is not because people are always intent on conflict or that nations are always at
war. Rather, this is because violence is not only active and physical, but also passive.
He was taught by his grandfather to consider whether his actions or lack of action
would in any way harm another. If so, this action should be considered as violent. He
states:
Gandhiji’s Talisman was: ‘Ask yourself if the action you contemplate will heal or
harm someone.’ (The Relevance of Gandhi Today)
Arun has taught that where passive violence takes place in terms of people ignoring,
hurting, insulting others, even if unintentionally, the response can often be a more
aggressive response. In this way a cycle of violence can be perpetual. Arun asks
people
..to consider the ways that they commit passive violence in their lives, showing
disrespect for others, displaying anger, hurting others through their words or
actions. It is only through such introspection that it is possible to change this
pattern. (Living Nonviolence).
The most famous saying attributed to Mahatma Gandhi is: “Be the change you want to
see in the world”. This is most appropriate in considering nonviolence in the sense of
acting in ways that avoid passive violence. Arun has demonstrated this in his own life.
An example being a time when a white South African politician visited India and Arun
and his wife showed this politician and his wife their hospitality. They spent a week
together, showing them around the area and providing meals and friendship. Arun
explains that they would often differ when discussing politics but would then back
away from the subject and move topic. At the end of their time together the white
politician and his wife embraced their hosts and shed tears of remorse over apartheid.
Thus, Arun may argue that friendship overcame hatred and ignorance.
Thoughts on forgiveness
Arun Gandhi has outlined his ideas regarding nonviolence, based on the philosophy of
his grandfather, Mohandas K. Gandhi. Arun holds that violence can be physical and
passive. Where violence is passive it relates to any actions or words that harm others
or the environment around us. This includes wasteful actions that harm the
environment and waste resources. Arun’s grandfather taught that wasting resources
would lead to poverty for many people.
Arun tells many stories relating to his own and his family’s history to describe his
beliefs in nonviolence. He describes how the British government of the time launched
a campaign to damage the reputation of his grandfather. At the time the prime minister
of South Africa was General J.C. Smuts. Despite the fact that Mohandas K. Gandhi
was constantly fighting with Smuts, it was the prime minister of South Africa who
affirmed that, while he disagreed with Gandhi’s politics, he had never seen a man
stand as tall as Gandhi in terms or morality and ethics. This is one example of how the
nonviolence of Gandhi brought positive results that have impacted on the beliefs and
actions of his grandson, Arun.
Arun has argued that in the face of injustice or wrongdoing, one should act in a
nonviolent way by looking to the action that will bring healing and resolution. By
attempting to live in a way where passive violence is diminished, humanity can
develop a lifestyle of nonviolence that might end the cycle of violence. Moreover, Arun
would argue that we have an imbalance at present in the distribution of wealth and
justice. Such imbalance breeds a passive violence. Whereas, Arun would encourage a
different understanding and a different approach:
Love, on the other hand, evokes positive thoughts and feelings like respect,
understanding, compassion, and so on. In the Native American tradition there is
an appropriate story that illustrates this point. Sitting in the wild under a tree a
grandfather tells his grandson there are two wolves inside every human being
who are at war with each other.
The grandson asks: “Which one wins?”
The Grandfather explains: “The one you feed.”
In a selfish, materialistic society we tend to feed the violent, arrogant wolf until it
attacks us and then we are disturbed. My Grandfather once said: The world can
produce enough “for everyone’s need, but not for everyone’s greed.”
(Atonement – The Gandhi Way)
We can see from these ideas, stories and quotes that Arun Gandhi believes in
forgiveness, love and healing as the response to violence, whether passive or
aggressive.
Arun writes for ‘Testimony’:
However, forgiveness has to be unconditional. Often people say that “I will
forgive you if you do this or that.” When conditions are attached we get
embroiled with the aggressor and lose our own mental and physical balance. At
the root of vengeance is anger and anger is like an acid that corrodes the
vessel that holds it as well as the object on which it is poured. It makes no
sense to destroy one’s own life for someone else’s mistake.
It is also wrong to believe that we “must forgive and forget.” We can never
forget the incident because the scar remains. But we have to forgive the
individual in the hope that he or she will learn from the compassion that we
display and not repeat what they did. When we forgive we refuse to make their
problem our problem but we dedicate our lives to constructively change the
situation and ensure that this does not happen again.
In April, 1919, the then British Governor of the State of Punjab in north India,
General Dyer, declared martial law and prohibited the assembly of more than
five people in any public place. However, the people of Punjab defied this unjust
order when emissaries of Gandhi came to Amritsar to explain the details of the
planned nonviolent political action. More than 10,000 men, women and children
assembled in the Jallianwala Bagh, a walled garden in the center of the city.
General Dyer brought his troops, blocked the only egress from the garden and
ordered the troops to open fire into the crowd. Within minutes 385 people were
killed and more than 1,800 were seriously injured. The troops stopped firing
only because they ran out of ammunition. At the enquiry commission General
Dyer said he would have continued firing and killing more people because “he
wanted to teach the people that they cannot defy British authority and get away
with it.”
The incident caused tremendous anger in the country and if a spark of violence
was ignited who knows what could have happened because the British were
outnumbered 4,000 to 1. There could have been a blood bath with thousands of
innocents dying. Gandhi realised this and decided instead of seeking revenge
he should seek to transform the British. He told the people of India that by doing
to the British what they did to us we will not be any better than them. But, if we
raise ourselves above them and dedicate our lives to ensure that this kind of
mad violence does not take place again we would achieve better results. Thus
he was able to channel the anger of the Indian people into nonviolent action
and forgive the British. As a result Arnold Toynbee, the eminent British
historian, wrote: much has been said about what Gandhi did for the Indians but
not much is said about what he did for the British. Gandhi liberated the British
from their Imperialism as much as he liberated the Indians from British
colonialism.
On the other hand the United States decided to seek revenge after September
11,2001, when the twin towers were destroyed. President Bush stoked the
anger of the American people and declared war on terrorism that compounded
the issue. The US and its Allies are embroiled in a war that has gone on for
more than ten years without a resolution and at the expense of hundreds of
thousands of lives not to speak of the destruction of property.
Booker T. Washington, the African American Educationist, once said: “To hold
someone down in the gutter it is essential for us to get down into the gutter
ourselves.” Similarly, to wreak vengeance we have to stoop down to their level.
Forgiveness elevates us whilst revenge reduces us to lesser human beings.
Questions for Arun
1 - What/who would you consider to be the greatest influences on your life and your
beliefs/philosophy?
Primary influences came from my parents who practiced nonviolence at home
and outside in their public life and, of course, my grandfather who laid the
foundation of my path to nonviolence. But I keep an open mind and am often
influenced by little children as well as adults, important and ordinary.
2 - As an advocate of nonviolence, you have often argued that when faced with
violence one should try to respond positively, choosing the action that will bring
healing or cause least hurt. Can you describe a time or times where this has been a
challenge for you and how your beliefs in nonviolence helped you?
There was an instance in my grandfather’s life when he was mobbed in Durban,
beaten up and almost lynched by a group of white racists. The police were able
to arrest four of the ring leaders and invited grandfather to come to the police
station and file charges. When grandfather reached the police station instead of
filing charges against the people he decided to forgive them. He told the police:
I do not want these men to be punished because that will not teach them
anything. Instead I would like to forgive them and let them walk out as free men
and then, turning to the four culprits, he said: ‘I hope you learn that racism is
evil and hatred only destroys your soul.’ They were later transformed and joined
Gandhi’s movement.
While I lived in India I met a white man who appeared to be troubled. When I
offered help and he introduced himself I realised he was a Member of the South
African Parliament and a member of the Nationalist Party that introduced
apartheid. I held him responsible for all the humiliation I had suffered in South
Africa and, subsequently, for making it impossible for me to join my widowed
mother and two sisters in South Africa simply because I married a woman from
India. My first reaction was to insult him as I was insulted and show him what it
means to dehumanize people. I was seeking an eye for an eye justice. But I
remembered the lessons I learned from my parents and grandparents and
realised they would not forgive me if I insulted him. So, I shook hands,
introduced myself and explained that I was a victim of apartheid. But I was
friendly and not insulting. He needed the help of someone to show him and his
wife around the city of Mumbai. For a week my wife and I played good hosts
and did everything they wanted to do and see. During this period we talked as
friends about apartheid. At the end of the visit when we said our final farewell
both, Mr. and Mrs. Basson embraced us and wept tears of remorse. Mr. Basson
said: “In these few days you have opened our eyes to the evils of apartheid. I
promise you that we will go back and fight apartheid.”
I was still a skeptic and not ready to believe him but I did follow his political
career for the next few years and realised that he was a changed man. He
spoke so vehemently against apartheid that he lost his election and was
dismissed from the party but remained steadfast against apartheid.
Had I resorted to the initial impulse of seeking eye for an eye justice Mr. Basson
would not have changed. He would have gone back a confirmed racist. But by
being friendly and nice it made him realise how evil hate and prejudice are. That
is the power of nonviolence -- to convert, not to confront.
3 - Can you tell us about a time when it has been difficult for you to forgive? How did
you resolve this?
I was very angry with the assassins who killed my grandfather and could not
forgive them although my parents tried to teach me that forgiving is what my
grandfather would have wanted. It was only in the 1960s when one of the
assassins, the brother of the main assassin, Nathuram Godse, was released
from prison after serving his sentence that I mustered courage to go to his
home and meet him. I did not go with rancour nor to confront him. I went with an
open heart and mind to try and understand what prompted them to do what they
did. He received my family and me with utmost respect and entertained us to
tea. We talked civilly and agreed to meet again. After three meetings when I
realized that there was nothing I could say would make him realise his mistake I
told him politely that there was no point in our discussions. That we were never
going to agree. ‘However’, I said, ‘I have forgiven you. The consequence of your
actions are for you to deal with. I refuse to destroy my life with anger and hate
for what you did.’ I believe this is the essence of nonviolence. We must always
try to convert people through respect and love and when you cannot you should
walk away satisfied that if nothing else you have succeeded in planting seeds in
the aggressor’s mind and hopefully it will make him or her think and change
later.
4 - Can you tell us about how your grandfather was able to deal so positively with
those who sought to oppress him and his people?
Grandfather realised that nonviolence is not passive, it is very active. You do
not walk away from a situation but you try to find an equitable solution. You do
not try to eliminate your opponent but try to change the person. Although people
believe that nonviolence is a negative philosophy he believed it is positive
because to practice nonviolence one has to purge oneself of all the hate,
prejudice, anger, frustration and other detrimental feelings and attitudes and
replace them with love, respect, understanding, acceptance, and appreciation.
When you love and respect human beings you will not hurt them. But if you are
afraid of, suspicious or angry towards people you would not mind hurting or
even destroying the other person. He believed in nonviolence as a way of life
and not as a strategy of convenience. He also believed that if a world claims to
be civilized then the way to civilization and peace is through changing the
Culture of Violence that prevails today to a Culture of Nonviolence.
5 - Can you describe for us the difference between passive and active violence and
how one can attempt to avoid a cycle of violence?
Passive violence is the kind of violence we commit without using physical force,
such as, discrimination, hate, prejudice, name calling, teasing, over
consumption of resources, selfishness, exploitation, etc. Active violence or
physical violence is the kind of violence where physical force is used like
murders, rapes, wars, killings, beatings, punching, slapping etc. When each one
of us does honest and deep introspection we will find that we all commit a lot
more passive violence even if we do not indulge in physical violence. If we
recognize our weaknesses we can do something to change them to strengths.
But if we live in denial then we will never change and we will continue to commit
passive violence. It is important to remember that passive violence is the fuel
that ignites physical violence. Therefore, since the fuel comes from each one of
us, we must become the change we wish to see in the world.
6 - How have your Hindu beliefs influenced your philosophy and your life?
The essence of Hinduism is unity and inclusiveness. The reason why Hindus
are derided for believing in hundreds of thousands of Gods is because of a
popular misconception. It is not that Hindus believe in so many Gods but they
believe that since no one has seen what the true image of God is how can we
say that our image is the right one and yours is wrong. So, Hindus accept the
images of everyone and allow people to worship whom they want, whichever
way they want to and where they want. There is absolute freedom. This
freedom does not exist in any other religion. Because of this freedom there is, in
theory, a respect for all other religions. Unfortunately this respect does not
manifest itself in daily practice because modern practitioners of Hinduism have
become victims of the prejudices practiced by others.
7 - Your grandfather said that “a friendly study of all the scriptures is the sacred duty of
every individual”. What are your views on the values and teachings of other religions?
I believe, as grandfather did, that every religion has a part of the Truth. The only
way we can come to understand the whole Truth or the true essence of any
religion is to take the bits of Truth from all other religions and incorporate that in
your own. He believed, and I also do, that we must learn to respect all religions
as we respect our own. We can respect faiths and beliefs only when we learn to
respect people and the diversity that exists among them. Gandhi believed in
secularism which does not mean rejecting one’s own religion but respecting all
religions as being equal. The practice of religion is like climbing a mountain. If
we are all going up to the same peak why should it matter to anyone which side
of the mountain we choose to climb from?
8 - As a Hindu, you have said that one can only pursue truth, not possess it. This leads
to acceptance of alternative images of God. How might you respond to the following
challenges:
That the scriptures of Christianity, Judaism or Islam claim to reveal the
exclusive truth of God
A religion is as imperfect and fallible as man since it is man who has translated
the scriptures and made us believe that it is the word of God. There cannot be
as many Gods as there are religions and beliefs because no God, or no
religion, should be about hating and destroying what we believe to be created
by God. If human beings are created in the image of God then it stands to
reason that a bit of God exists in each one of us. Therefore when we disrespect
each other, hurt each other or kill each other we are slowly killing God and
God’s creation. There is no reason (or proof) to believe that those who
translated the scriptures had a direct hotline to God. The Western family of
religions believe that the word of God comes through the Son of God. In each
religion we believe that sometime or the other God descends upon the earth in
human form to set us on the right course. If this be so we have to ask ourselves
the simple question why is it that we follow them in life, worship them in death
but refuse to make their cause our cause? Why is it that we pray at our
convenience by simply mouthing the words but never practice them? Why is the
word of God enshrined in a book to be read and forgotten? Why do we believe
that only those who believe as we do are right and all others are wrong; why we
are good and others are bad? For any philosophy to be vibrant it has to be
living and I consider all the scriptures as Philosophy. The moment we put the
philosophy into a book it ceases to be vibrant and becomes a dogma. That is
why we refer to books written thousands of years ago for answers to present
day problems. These answers are interpreted by human beings because the
scriptures are ambiguous. When we accept what was written thousands of
years ago as Truth we have a closed mind, like a room that is shut and no fresh
air is allowed to enter. It becomes stale and fetid and impossible to live in. The
same happens to the mind. A closed mind is fetid. Truth is ever changing. What
we may accept as Truth today will not be Truth a few days later. The
constitutions of countries are amended hundreds of times because what was
true when they were written is no longer true today.
When we believe in pursuing Truth we have an open mind to accept differences
and changes and incorporating them and changing them as we go along to
eventually arrive at somewhere close to the Truth.
That in accepting all images of God we must accept even those which cause
harm. I think it is wrong to believe that God does wrong. It is man who does
wrong in the name of God. When Christians justified racism and lynching of
blacks in the United States it would be wrong to say that God sanctioned this
although the Christians did try to justify this as sanctioned by religion. Similarly,
because the Muslims today are waging a war and killing in the name of God
does not mean the Prophet, peace be unto him, has been sanctioning war. It is
man who misrepresents religion and God. The fault lies in the imperfection of
man and in the belief in a dogma.
Activities to support learning
The following tasks are designed to encourage learners to engage with the information
provided about the thoughts and teachings of Arun Gandhi.
Practitioners are encouraged to consider a range of ways for learners to carry out the
research and reflection required. These might include:

Paired, group and class discussions and debates

Online discussion forums (such as a Glow blog)

Online project work (possibly making use of Glow Wikis)

Creating presentations (using PowerPoint, Prezi, posters, etc)

Videos, interviews or filmed role plays

Creating lessons or presentations for younger pupils, assemblies or
adult/community engagements/events

Recording a podcast
Thoughts on religion

Reading Arun Gandhi’s Thoughts on religion and the section Questions for
Arun, and with reference to any relevant wider reading, summarise Arun
Gandhi’s beliefs about: (a) the existence of God; (b) human nature and the
relationship between God and people.

How can Arun Gandhi’s religious beliefs be seen in what he says about life,
'nonviolence' and in some of the stories about his actions?

In considering Arun Gandhi’s religious beliefs, how do they match or differ with
your own views of humanity and God?

Do you consider Arun Gandhi’s view to be a positive view of religion? Would the
world be a different place if more people adopted these kinds of views?

Discuss any situations in Scotland today where religious views cause tension?
How might Arun Gandhi encourage those involved to speak and act. How would
you act if involved?

Summarise and discuss Arun Gandhi’s views on the potential for any one
religion to hold an exclusive claim to truth. Do you agree with his thinking?

By researching the views of either Christianity, Islam or Judaism, explain why
some followers of one of these faiths might justify their beliefs in an exclusive
version of truth.
Tasks on 'nonviolence'

How is nonviolence more than 'simply a counter to the anger, hurt and
dehumanisation of violence'? Learners should make reference to the sections
Thoughts on 'nonviolence' and Questions for Arun, and wider reading.

Discuss the difference between passive and active violence and how the
phrase 'be the change you want to see' is relevant to these.

Can you think of any current situations locally, nationally or globally where the
philosophy of 'nonviolence' could make a difference?

Can you set out the philosophy of 'nonviolence’ advocated by Mohandas K
Gandhi, and followed by Arun, in a way that could be understood by either: an
S1 class, a group of your own peers who have not studied Arun’s beliefs, or a
group of adults?

By researching key Hindu beliefs, do you agree that 'nonviolence' naturally fits
with this religion?

By researching another world religion, does 'nonviolence' fit with any other
religious faith?

Have you encountered a situation where you feel taking a 'nonviolent' stance, in
line with the teachings of Gandhi, may have produced a positive outcome?

Is 'nonviolence' a philosophy you would be interested in learning more about?
Why could this be important for you in life?
Tasks on forgiveness

With reference to the sections Thoughts on forgiveness and Questions for Arun,
and any relevant wider reading, summarise Arun Gandhi’s views on
forgiveness, with reference to stories from his own life.

How do Arun Gandhi’s views on forgiveness compare or contrast with those of
another world religion?

How do Arun Gandhi’s views on forgiveness compare or contrast with your own
views on forgiveness?

Research and present a case study where forgiveness has been demonstrated
in a challenging situation, for example the mother of Anthony Walker, a
teenager murdered in a racist attack in Liverpool in 2005, who forgave the
killers.

Can you discuss a situation locally, nationally or globally where forgiveness
may provide a positive solution?

Is 'unconditional' forgiveness always possible?

Do you agree with Arun Gandhi that one should forgive but not forget? Does
remembering the action risk a potential hindrance to forgiveness?

By researching a world religion of your choice, is forgiveness as described by
Arun Gandhi the same as described within that faith?