The term “soul force” has been familiar to me for some time, however, Satyagraha is a fresh discovery for me—clinging to truth. Though, perhaps because of my exposure to so much Buddhist terminology (the word ‘clinging’ is rather loaded), I like to think of it as an unwavering commitment to truth. I think it’s a commitment rooted in the soul,which I believe, when the world is seen through that larger, less self-absorbed perspective, inherently recognizes what is good, beautiful, just, and virtuous in the world. Not to say that there is an absolute morality or ethic… Perhaps another way to put it, to borrow a Trungpa term, the world is basically good. On some intrinsic level, we all are in touch with that goodness. Soul-force, or Satyagraha then, is the commitment to uphold our harmonious relation with the basic goodness of the world, and to be warriors when that goodness is disregarded or blatantly abused. Warriors that can stand firmly in the recognition of our unity and ineffable connection with one another while simultaneously acknowledging our diversity—it’s richness as well as its challenges. No enemies… Save our own ignorance and fear, yet, even those we eventually have to sit down for tea and a friendly chat. What a powerful realization that is.

Admittedly, I feel somewhat critical of one reoccurring theme in Hope or Terror, and that is the tendency to glorify the actions of one person, even as exemplary a human being as Gandhi, to such a degree that they almost cease to be human—but rather, somehow superhuman. For example, the implication that Gandhi was in some way responsible for the liberation of 50 subsequent countries from the yoke of colonialism is simply too much. An inspiration, yes, but he was not responsible. There are two points as to why I think this kind of thinking is actually more destructive to the spirit of Satyagraha than helpful…

1.)   I think it’s not only important to not forget the wide range of inspiration from great thinkers, writers, philosophers, and mystics that Gandhi drew upon,  but also the many souls who were so fundamentally important to the cause… The nameless and countless people who supported Gandhi and what he stood for with all their heart… and actually made all that change possible. Putting the emphasis so strongly on one person as being the cause for change seems to neglect that very important point. As was mentioned in the article, the difference between what “works” and what works… What works often has unseen ripples that manifest in unexpected and surprising ways… If Thoreau knew that his writing was going to work in such a way on Gandhi and an entire nation of people… My point being, Gandhi was a part of a network of souls seen and unseen, present and past, that made the work he did possible. I think it’s critical not to forget that because…

2.)   If we all think we have to be Gandhi to make any real change on the earth… Well, that’s a pretty damn intimidating pair of shoes (or sandals) to try and step into. I think many of us rationalize our inaction on the grounds that we are just not anyone special enough to really make any impact… I’m no Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, why bother? But it’s so important to remember that we do make an impact and those great people would not have been great without the supportive people around them. We can’t discount our own power and ability to impact the world… that’s so tremendously important.