A determined opposition was put up against the conditions regarding
Swadeshi that were laid down in the civil disobedience resolution passed
by the All-India Congress Committee at Delhi. It was directed against
two requirements, namely, that the civil resister offering resistance in
terms of that resolution was bound to know hand-spinning and use only
hand-spun and hand-woven _khadi_; and that in the event of a district or
tahsil offering civil disobedience _en masse_ the district or the tahsil
concerned must manufacture its own yarn and cloth by the hand. The
opposition betrayed woeful ignorance of the importance of hand-spinning.
Nothing but hand-spinning can banish pauperism from the land. Paupers
cannot become willing sufferers. They have never known the pain of
plenty to appreciate the happiness of voluntarily suffering hunger or
other bodily discomfort. Swaraj for them can only mean ability to
support themselves without begging. To awaken among them a feeling of
discontent with their lot without providing them with the means of
removing the cause thereof is to court certain destruction, anarchy,
outrage and plunder in which they themselves will be the chief victims.
Hand-spinning alone can possibly supply them with supplementary and
additional earnings. Hand-weaving for many and carding for a limited
number can provide complete livelihood. But hand-weaving is not a lost
art. Several million men know hand-weaving. But very few know
hand-spinning in the true sense of the term. Tens of thousands are, it
is true, turning the wheel to-day but only a few are spinning yarn. The
cry all over is that hand-spun yarn is not good enough for warp. Just as
half-baked bread is no bread, even so ill-spun weak thread is no yarn.
Thousands of men must know hand-spinning to be able in their respective
districts to improve the quality of the yarn that is now being spun in
the country. Therefore those who offer civil disobedience for the sake
of establishing Swaraj must know hand-spinning. Mark, they are not
required to turn out yarn every day. It would be well if they did. But
they must know how to spin even properly twisted yarn. It was a happy
omen to me, that in spite of the opposition the amendment was rejected
by a large majority. One argument advanced in favour of rejection was,
that the Sikh men considered it an undignified occupation to spin and
looked down upon hand-weaving. I do hope that the sentiment is not
representative of the brave community. Any community that despises
occupations that bring an honest livelihood is a community going down an
incline. If spinning has been the speciality of women, it is because
they have more leisure and not because it is an inferior occupation. The
underlying suggestion that a wielder of the sword will not wield the
wheel is to take a distorted view of a soldier's calling. A man who
lives by the sword does _not_ serve his community even as the soldiers
in the employ of the Government do not serve the country. The wielding
of the sword is an unnatural occupation resorted to among civilized
people only on extraordinary occasions and only for self-defence. To
live by hand-spinning and hand-weaving is any day more _manly_ than to
live by killing. Aurangzeb was not the less a soldier for sewing caps.
What we prize in the Sikhs is not their ability to kill. The late Sardar
Lachman Singh will go down to posterity as a hero, because he knew how
to die. The Mahant of Nankhana Saheb will go down to posterity as a
murderer. I hope therefore that no man will decline to learn the
beautiful life-giving art of hand-spinning on the ground of its supposed
inferiority.
_Y. I.--10th Nov. 1921._