Dr. Veena Howard on Gandhi, Non-Violence, and the Pursuit of Compassion in a Modern World

Over the past years, Udaan has interviewed a majority of amazing people and recently, Udaan had the privilege to interview Dr. Veena Howard. Dr. Howard is a distinguished scholar and professor specializing in Gandhian philosophy and South Asian dharmic traditions. Her extensive work explores the concept of non-violence, not just as a political strategy but as a comprehensive principle and way of life rooted in compassion and care. In this insightful conversation, she delves into the contemporary relevance of Gandhian ideals, the critical role of women in non-violent movements, and how these philosophies can be applied in our modern, digital world.

As a first, she was asked about how she relates the particular idea of Gandhian non-violence to today's times that we are living, how relevant it is and how important she thinks it is, and she said,

“So, what I want to really start with, let us think about the question of violence and violence, it is not just a Gandhian idea, Gandhi really put it on the map.

The non-violence side of love, non-violence, care, compassion which are all different facets of non-violence according to Gandhi, are the foundation of our humanity. What do we want in life? Do you want somebody to slap you or do you want somebody to start with you?”

She mentioned that the notion that it was Gandhian non-violence and whether it is relevant, comes out of the lack of understanding of what non-violence means.

“So, do not think just about non-violence as a political strategy, think about non-violence as a principle, as a way of life. We all want peace, love, non-violent. I call it non-violence. Sometimes the violence is implicit in our words, in our education systems, our students freak out with the professor's grades, that can be, according to Gandhi, can be violent.”

She further mentioned how even social media creates bad self-esteem for young girls. She implied that according to Gandhi, that's violent. So, it's more relevant than ever, because we have to think about the principle of interrelations, not just us, but the environment, to the animals, to the birds, to the plants.

Moving on, when asked how she would implement this in modern times and respond to the critics, keeping in mind that there were critiques in Gandhi's times as well, she replied,

“Yes. So, it's not a new thing. So, when I write about it, I say, you know, this is not a new critique. But, when I study non-violence in Gandhi, it's misunderstood. They think of it as a response to acute situations.”

She further implied that violence doesn’t start at the moment of attack. It brews much earlier. However, there are many opportunities before it to stop violence.

"We don't use negotiations. We don't come to the table. And, all geopolitical issues, we just say, they are my enemies, I don't want it. So, that's not a non-violent way.

If we really want peace, we should let our egos go, and have negotiations, dialogue, bring them to the table, and try to solve them. They are all the world's problems."

She insisted that more than self-sacrifice, it is the sacrifice of the ego and that there is often a misconception of Gandhi’s ideas. She further reminisced about the time her Pakistani parents were kicked out and spent days homeless.

"That's why I'm writing on the violence supporting during the time of India's partition. Especially against women and children."

When asked about the reason she chose Gandhi for her study and which aspect about him stood out to her, she replied

“My professor friend asked me to come and teach an adult education course with him on Gandhi. And, I said, I don't know anything about Gandhi. One woman asked, why did Gandhi do service? And, he says, I don't know, let's ask Veena."

And, I had no clue. So, I began to read about that. And, all the books that were available, psychoanalyzing him, or politicizing his work, or, like, making him such a shrewd politician. So I said, it couldn't be that. Or, was it that? So, I shifted my field, and began to study Gandhi.”

Coming to our next question

“You also deal with a lot of, you know, religious aspects and how it helps in shaping up the ethical and political thought. So, when we come to South Asian traditions, particularly Jainism and Hinduism, how do you think it conceptualized non-violence which is different from western frameworks?”

“So, the way of non-violence, especially in Jainism and in Hinduism, is very comprehensive. It's not just to humans and it's not just in killing. So, for example, Jainism categorically denies that we should do any kind of violence.

Any microorganisms should not be harmed. And they are eating very carefully.

So, I think that kind of, you will never find in the western world. So, when you say in the Bible the Ten Commandments is the thou shalt not kill. So, I always ask the Bible, what does that mean? Then they change to thou shalt not murder.”

We asked her how she saw this particular discourse on decolonizing religious studies. Especially when the Western academia tries to engage with South Asian traditions. Sometimes it does not make sense to them.

“So, I have been part of this discourse for more than 15 years. So, hence I wrote a book called The Hindu ,Jain, Buddhist and Sikh traditions. I didn't call the word religions in that.

Because religion itself is a very Western category. So, what does religion mean? Religion means generally you have one God, one book and one way of being in a religion.

So, how I define it, the dharma is, it doesn't have a solid boundaries. While the Western religions, as we studied, have solid, firm boundaries.”

She spoke about how the scholars back in 1800 or 1900 did not have access to what the Indians/South Asians were thinking. She also mentioned that she is involved with quite a few platforms one of them being called Dharma Association, Dharma Academy of North America which was started by her colleague Rita Sharma.

“I can't just write Gandhi as India.I have to write as a scholar, I have to write as a thinker, and critically think about it. And then see what he is thinking. You used to say, the Indians are doing these kinds of crazy rituals. And now they're saying, let's see what they mean by that. Because from the outsider's point of view, what may look strange, from an insider point of view, is very beautiful. So religious studies have developed quite a bit for the last 10-15 years.”

To add on to the previous conversation, when asked to comment about the insider-outsider debate happening in India on the basis of caste and how olden practices are now being reclaimed, she said,

“Right, right. I know one thing about Hinduism and other religions is that we constantly self-reflect, self-critique, and self-question. What is religion? What are practices? They were at one time, there was a reason for this.

There was a Muslim scholar from Pakistan. And he is working on Green Islam and Vegan Islam. So I told him, I said, how do you say that because it's part of your tradition.He goes, no it's not. So I think we need to think about violence, non-violence question. It's not just pertaining to us, but to the other beings as well.And even on the name of God, on the name of worship So what Gandhi said once, he said, Whatever does not satisfy the test of reason, don't do it. So I really got, I really held onto that.“

Continuing her thoughts on applying reason to traditional practices, she elaborated on Gandhi's complex perspective on animal sacrifice and cow protection.

“And so he did allow, on the one hand he was critiquing animal sacrifice. And on the other hand he says we should not ban the cow killing. Because the Muslims don't see cow as holy. So if they don't see as a holy, then why not let them? So he got very controversial with that.

But when I read that, how I see it, he says if you want to ban cow killing, just ban all of it. Why do we need that? So I think that's the whole point. Cow is holy, so is deer, so is pig, so is chicken… But then he said how do we treat the cow? That's the other thing.

If we think it's holy, then we won't leave them on the streets. We won't abandon them… Because it requires a lot more discipline, sacrifice, changing lifestyle. And yet in the end it can bring inner joy and peace.”

She explained that Gandhi's reasoning was often controversial because it challenged hypocrisy. He questioned the selective holiness of one animal over others and pointed out the contradiction of venerating cows while also abandoning and mistreating them . This approach, she noted, forces people to confront difficult questions about violence that require significant discipline and lifestyle changes.

When asked about the role women played in contributing to the non-violence movement established by Gandhi, she stated,

“Women are the jewels of the panthas… from the very early on in South Africa and to India, the women were front and center… he saw the women's suffrage movement for rights to vote in England. So he was reading that. And then he knew that his mother was a resister, a non-violent resister. And he saw that his wife was a resister to him. She taught him how to be a resister… they had means to resist the forces of violence… if you look at the pictures, that's my project right now. Gandhi and women… They were not just simply followers. That's what bothers me when people call women followers. No, they were the leaders on their right.”

Dr. Howard emphasized that women were not merely followers but active leaders from the very beginning of Gandhi's movements. She pointed out that Gandhi was influenced by the women's suffrage movement in England and by the non-violent resistance of his own mother and wife . These women were leaders in their own right, creating organizations, fighting against social restrictions, and even questioning Gandhi's decisions, such as their initial exclusion from the Salt March. She stressed that their contributions must be elevated and recognized as central to the movement's success.

Regarding the evolution of non-violence in the age of digital activism, she commented,

“Yeah, I think digital platform can be very helpful. And I think it really helped during the BLM, Black Lives Matter… But there is another step is missing… how are we going to have the sustainable solidarity? Sustainable commitment?... It's called, I don't know if you know the word, selectivism? Yes. It's like a finger activism… I say that the digital activism is important to get people out and get people thinking. But now what do we do? So now the real training has to happen. The real sacrifice has to happen… So-called bodies, I call it embodied activism, it's not digital activism cannot replace.”

She acknowledged that digital platforms are powerful for mobilization and raising awareness, citing the Black Lives Matter movement as an example. However, she cautioned against "slacktivism," or "finger activism," which often lacks sustainable commitment . Dr. Howard argued that while digital activism is a good starting point, it cannot replace "embodied activism"—the physical presence and sacrifice required for profound change . She also warned about the negative effects of social media, such as spreading misinformation and creating hyper-anxiety, which can undermine the principles of non-violence.

In conclusion, when asked how her work on the philosophy of non-violence has personally changed her life, she reflected,

“So how I see now, I have to see Gandhi as an idea. Not as a person. An idea that emphasizes that love is stronger than hate. Non-violence is better tools than violence… It's not Gandhi as a person, not Gandhi as statues… but what he has opened up to people… I can't change the world, I can solve the world's problems, but I can do that in my small space. Students, family, community… Never represented himself as a perfect man… and I think the problem happens when we see him as a perfect man, and we idolize him, put him on the pedestal.”

Dr. Howard explained that her perspective has shifted to see Gandhi not as a perfect individual to be idolized, but as the embodiment of an "idea" that love is stronger than hate and non-violence is superior to violence . This allows her to focus on applying these principles in her own sphere of influence, such as with her students and community . She finds that presenting Gandhi as an imperfect person who made and admitted mistakes makes his philosophy more accessible and human, avoiding the pitfalls of idolization .

The conversation with Dr. Veena Howard was an incredibly enriching experience, feeling less like a formal interview and more like a profound discussion on creating a more compassionate world. Her final thoughts left us with a powerful perspective: to approach Gandhian philosophy not by idolizing a perfect man on a pedestal, but by engaging with Gandhi as an "idea"—an idea that love is stronger than hate and that each of us can enact change in our own small spaces . Udaan extends its deepest gratitude to Dr. Howard for her valuable time and for sharing her wealth of knowledge and insightful perspectives with us.