Freedom

I can begin writing about my idea of Freedom by quoting some of the most famous speeches made by remarkable men, both Indian and otherwise. But that would rob the whole exercise of its purpose, wouldn’t it? Yet, I would do exactly the same, not because I am shorn of ideas or that I do not have any contoured definition for myself, but because I want to trace what has been talked about and juxtapose that with what I think. That way, a long due process of dedicating some time in thinking about a subject that has been the hallmark of the existence humankind can be initiated. I am no scholar, and I do not proclaim that I will produce something momentous, but what I can do is reflect on what defines my being, the rationale of it and the ultimate objective that underlines it.

Of all the recorded exemplars, Lincoln probably was the earliest, and perhaps the most influential architect of the concept of a free land, “a nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” There might have been many more advocates of freedom before him, and even more philosophical, but what sets Lincoln apart from them is the nature of his campaign. While others might have been fighting for their freedom, the independence of their land, Lincoln was advocating for freedom in a nation already free from foreign rule. Those days, the ghost of slavery was rampant in the States, and being a northerner himself, Lincoln was more vocal than any other political figure in the exorcism of the ghost. What might have freedom meant to him? Was it the same for his fellow Americans? I cannot guess.

The only other example I would like to cite before I go on to my rendition of freedom is that of Gurudev Tagore. While he was arguably the single most intellectual figure in the history of modern India, he was also a freedom fighter within his ambit. I do not belittle the gargantuan contributions of many other Indian freedom fighters, but this is not what we are talking of is it? Freedom, a territory “where the mind is without fear and the head is held high”, was much more than the independence from British rule for Gurudev. Where tireless striving stretches its hands towards perfection and where the stream of reason has not been lost in the dreary desert sand of dead habit, it is that free land where he wants India to awaken.  

When I think of Freedom, suddenly everything starts becoming nebulous. The independence associated with the flight of thoughts suddenly starts getting arrested as I find myself caught in a situation where I have lot of views but am really short of an opinion. One might wonder what the difference is, and that is where it becomes difficult to identify what is a cultivated view and is an original opinion. There is so much of brouhaha, and in such a limited time-frame, that it becomes overkill. Everyone, all of a sudden, has an opinion.  Is it a patriotic feeling? Is it about killing the rampant corruption? Probably…not infringing on the freedom of someone else?

I was walking along the boulevard, thinking about the meaning of freedom, the significance of freedom and went on to ponder on relevance of Independence Day in the modern day context. Unlike most other people, who talk about patriotism and all that blah, what was more vocal in my concerns was the tolerance, and more than that, acceptance of the idea of individuality. When I say freedom, I think I should mean the “swikriti” of my being, not only in my immediate surroundings but also in the proximity on which I do have a direct bearing. I can claim to be a member of a free society and go on to exercise my freedom in plentiful ways, but will that guarantee my acceptance? I am doubtful. I can, likewise, lay a claim to being a free citizen but will that assure me of being treated as one? What happens when I impinge on someone else’s individuality, directly or indirectly? Is there something at all that can be called someone’s individuality? Is freedom trying to break free from all obligations that one feels were a restraint? We can discuss at length about these and many more questions, and that will not establish anything; it will not precipitate anything from the pall that already is.

Gandhi had a very eloquent definition of freedom, or independence, if I may. People say he was free from any fear, that he taught his countrymen to rid all reservations that restricted their thoughts, thereby making simple things complicated. Fair enough. He had his own ways. Does he, by any means, if measured by the methods of achieving his ends, become any greater or any different that many of his contemporaries, Indian or not? No. Many others say he was an industrious schemer. Will that reduce his impact world over? No. The one thing that can make the simple crack in the perception of Gandhi’s and others look like a wider chasm is the acceptance that he has gained in the history of humankind. I am not polar when I say that he can be called one of the most influential and popular political figures of the last century, almost as tall, if not taller that Churchill or JFK. And many today might not like eulogies being written about him, but that fact of the matter is that when we talk about freedom, we inherently talk about Gandhi. Such was his stature and such is his acceptance.

Was Gandhi a free man? I am too diminutive a person to talking stuff of such magnitude, and trying to make sense simultaneously. I am an ordinary person, and like ordinary beings, I have ordinary opinions. What I say of believe is undoubtedly conditioned by what I listen to, what I see and what I am subject to. The emotions that an American has about freedom are visibly different from what I am subject to. Money minded person might think the Laissez-Faire to be the ultimate form of freedom; a patriot might want to see his nation’s flag waving high above in the space of nationhood; a socially ostracized entity might want acceptance; a painter has a different pair of glasses to envision freedom and they all might be different. Agreed. But do I have something that I can say is my idea of freedom? I am afraid.

Allow me to take another step towards understanding freedom and putting it before you. When I see people from different walks of life, engaged in completely disconnected activities, acknowledge a particular code of conduct, without begrudging the necessity or perhaps the need of it, I think I am living in a society where the civic code can be indubitably be called Freedom; when I see cultures intermingled to the extent that the physical divisions seem a mere camouflage to the real congruence that resonates in those cultures, I think I am a part of a free social echelon; when I see conflicting ideologies, and the subsequent disposition to harbor the differences argumentatively, I think I am witnessing a free thought process, “where”, to quote Gurudev, “the words come out from the depth of truth”, and “the world has not been broken down into fragments by narrow domestic walls.”

Now, there is a little skepticism growing in my mind, even as I point out my definitions of freedom. Will these ideas be accepted as illustrations of Freedom? Am I able to talk sanity? Here is where I will conclude. If I am a free man, I have all the time and entitlement to produce my variants, and if I am a part of a free society, the populace will, magnanimously tolerate my catharsis and accept it, even if after a stimulating and provocative discourse. By the virtue of being living beings, we are free to follow any course of action or voice any concern/opinion, but that alone does not vouchsafe a free identity. The collective unconscious of a people that can together represent a level of acceptance for any independently expressed thought, action or deed, will indeed be the hallmark of freedom for me. Freedom is not, and cannot be a product of a fleeting thought, but a companion of an ever present identity.

Signing off

Vivek Sharma