**1. Introduction**

The article on Gandhi's use of scriptures in this Special Issue on nonviolence and religion ended with a short overview of his ambivalent relationship with the Hebrew Bible (Noort 2022, pp. 13–14) and the big exception: Daniel. This paper explores the importance of the Gandhian Daniel when combined with other characters from tradition and authoritative scriptures. It sketches the background of the literary context and historical setting of the biblical book of Daniel from which Gandhi took his example and reflects on the possibility of deepening Gandhi's intention by combining the courtier Daniel with the visionary sage of the apocalypses in contrast to other ideologies of the Seleucid era.

I begin with the Gandhian texts in which Daniel appears (2), ask for the reception of Gandhi's approach in the scholarly discourse on Daniel (3), continue with the book of Daniel and its apocalyptic program in a historical context (4), and make a plea for giving

**Citation:** Noort, Ed. 2022. Gandhi and the World of the Hebrew Bible: The Case of Daniel as Satyagrahi. *Religions* 13: 859. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/rel13090859

Academic Editor: Jakob De Roover

Received: 16 July 2022 Accepted: 9 September 2022 Published: 14 September 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

Daniel a place in the debates on nonviolence by reading the courtier and the apocalyptic seer together through the Gandhian lens (5).

Daniel, the legendary sage, counsellor, dream interpreter, and visionary, was inspirational for Gandhi as a Jewish courtier who obeyed the laws of his God more than the edicts of the king due to hostile conspiracies. Thrown into the lion's den, he was saved by his God, whose universal power was recognized by the sovereign (Dan 6:1–28). Gandhi's favorite chapter is a part of the collection of court narratives (Dan 1–6). Together with canonical parallels such as the Joseph novella and the book of Esther and the non-canonical, widespread narrative of *Ah. iqar* (Porten and Yardeni 1993, pp. 23–57), they treat the theme of the threats and precariousness of Jewish life in an exposed position under foreign rule. For Gandhi, the way in which the hero handled the threat was crucial. In a wider context, the overarching question is how an initially divinely legitimized foreign rule can be resisted and ended. To draw out how the stories about Daniel answer this question, I compare the different approaches to this question in the books of Daniel and Maccabees.

#### **2. Daniel and Companions**

In his speeches and writings, Gandhi often referred to Daniel by explaining and developing the most important aspects of *satyagraha.* Depending on time and context, Daniel received company (See Table 1).


**Table 1.** An overview.

#### *2.1. Daniel in South Africa*

At a meeting in Johannesburg on 24 May 1909, Gandhi mentioned Daniel for the first time in a public speech when, just released, he looked back on his third time in jail.1 From February 25 onward, he had been imprisoned for not producing his (burnt) registration certificate. After the early morning release from his three months of imprisonment with hard labor, he addressed crowds first in a mosque in Pretoria, later in Johannesburg. The reference to Daniel appears only in the English part of the Johannesburg speech, a meeting where Gandhi was received as a hero; Rev. Joseph Doke was also present there.2 In jail, Gandhi "found much consolation in reading the book of the prophet Daniel". He had been able to borrow a Bible from the prison's library and it formed part of his extensive reading. Daniel was one of the "greatest passive resisters that ever lived". He was an example for Indians when they were confronted with laws "in conflict with their consciences" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 9, p. 220). The tertium comparationis of Daniel and the Indians in South Africa was the opposition against laws in conflict with conscience. Though *satyagraha* had already been coined the year before, here Gandhi still used "passive resistance". Gandhi probably encountered Daniel during his third prison term because Daniel does not appear in his extensive accounts of his previous imprisonments.3

#### 2.1.1. Daniel's Elder Brother: Socrates

What historically would be nonsense: calling Socrates Daniel's elder brother, makes sense through the way Gandhi used these two beloved examples: Daniel and Socrates. Next to (daily) readings of the Gita, Quran and the Bible, the Upanishads, and the Jain poet, Rajchandra, it was Daniel and Socrates who encouraged and comforted Gandhi during his imprisonments. Especially Socrates figured prominently during his earlier prison stays. The figure of Socrates functioned in two directions. Firstly, as a stimulus and comfort for Gandhi himself during his prison terms. Secondly, as a mighty weapon and message for the Indians during the struggle.

The first mention of Socrates appeared in a "Special Contribution" to the *Indian Opinion* of 26 August 1905 (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 5, pp. 69–70),<sup>4</sup> but Socrates begins to become especially important for Gandhi during his readings<sup>5</sup> and rewriting of Plato's *Apology*. In a series of six articles,<sup>6</sup> he paraphrased the *Apology* during his time in prison and used it as a wake-up call to the Indians not only in South Africa but also in India.<sup>7</sup> The homiletic character of his paraphrase may be illustrated by the last sentence:

"This (process and death of Socrates) is a historical event, that is, an event that actually occurred. We pray to God, and want our readers also to pray, that they, and we too, may have the moral strength which enabled Socrates to follow virtue to the end and to embrace death as if it were his beloved. We advise everyone to turn his mind again and again to Socrates words and conduct". (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 229)

In a stimulating article, Phiroze Vasunia (Vasunia 2015) studied Gandhi's paraphrase and its connections to Ruskin's *Unto This Last*, <sup>8</sup> stressed Gandhi's own preparedness for death and dying for a just cause, and made clear which translation Gandhi used (Cary 1905; Vasunia 2015, p. 179). He demonstrated Socrates's/Gandhi's willingness to self-sacrifice and die worthily rather than to escape in a cowardly manner.<sup>9</sup> Vasunia carefully compared Cary's translation and the Gujurati and English version of Gandhi's paraphrase of the third speech of Socrates (Plato 2017, *Apology* 38c–39b).10

Gandhi identified himself strongly with the character of Socrates, resulting in the title of his rewriting of the *Apology* in Gujurati *Ek satyavirni katha*, "Story of a true soldier" or, as Gandhi 1958–1994 vol. 8 renders it, "A soldier of truth" (Vasunia 2015, pp. 177–78). Moreover, his readings of the *Apology* and his view on Socrates were an incentive for the further development of *satyagraha* instead of "passive resistance". It was the influential art critic, social thinker, evangelical, and later Oxford professor John Ruskin (1819–1900), and especially his four essays from 1860 titled "Until This Last",11 that influenced Gandhi

strongly. One week after the closing article on Socrates's *Apology*, Gandhi began with "extracts" from Ruskin's essays because "Socrates gave us some idea of man's *duty*. He *practised* his precepts.12 It can be argued that Ruskin's ideas are an elaboration of Socrates's. Ruskin has described vividly how one who wants to live by Socrates's ideas should acquit himself in the different vocations" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 241). However, just as Gandhi stated that Ruskin elaborated the ideas of Socrates, we may focus on the reversed direction: Gandhi read Socrates through the lens of Ruskin (Vasunia 2015). Ruskin stated that there are five intellectual professions/vocations in a civilized nation: the soldier (for defense), the pastor (for teaching), the physician (for health), the lawyer (for enforcing justice), and the merchant (for provisions), and that their duty is to die for their cause in case of battle, falsehood, plagues, injustice, and famine. Gandhi united these professions in himself. He was a preacher, a healer, a lawyer, came from a caste of merchants, and was prepared to die for his cause (Vasunia 2015, pp. 176–78). The image of Socrates preferring death above flight or giving up his divinely given duty, on the one side, and the vision of Ruskin on the other side inspired Gandhi to develop *satyagraha* further.

The result of Gandhi's prison readings of Plato appeared on 4 April 1908 for the first time in *Indian Opinion*. <sup>13</sup> In his preface, Gandhi already mentioned the principal elements that made Socrates an example and an inspiration. Socrates lived in the fear of God and had no fear of death.14 He himself adhered to the traditional religion but encouraged the people to fight the corrupt elements of its practices. Socrates showed no fear after his death sentence and took the poison smilingly. *Mahatma* Socrates "was a great *satyagrahi* and adopted *satyagraha* against his own people". His words could be an elixir for healing the disease of India, i.e., the British oppression. For "we must learn to live and die like Socrates" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, pp. 172–74). It is not difficult to see how Gandhi recreated Socrates in his own image and how in turn this image inspired him. The intertwining of Socrates's repeated assertion that he fulfils a divine mission,15 doing his duty "unto this last", the unshaken awareness of being innocent, and the courage of dying fearlessly for the good of the community illustrated the importance of Socrates for Gandhi. Socrates, Gandhi, and Ruskin came together in Gandhi's rendering of the incentive never to give up your task from the *Apology*:

"The right thing for a man is not to desert his post, even if he has to run the risk of being killed or any other risk, whether he has chosen the post of his own will or has been put there by a superior" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 213; Plato 2017, *Apology* 28d).16

Leaving his post would mean for Socrates ceasing to practice philosophy, to critically examine the youth and the citizens of Athens, and no longer "opening the eyes of men for their own ignorance" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, pp. 196–97; Plato 2017, *Apology* 23b). This post is divinely given and therefore, "I shall obey the god (*ho theos [Apollo]*) rather than you; and so long as I have breath and am able, I shall not stop practicing philosophy" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 213; Plato 2017, *Apology* 29d). Metaphorically, his task is to be reins for strong horses, i.e., Athens and the Athenians.17

Even more important than the repeated statements on his adherence to traditional religion and beliefs in response to the charge of atheism are Socrates's utterances that "something god-inspired and spirit-like comes to me" (*hoti moi theion ti kai daimonion gignetai),* a voice (*phon¯ e¯*), a spiritual sign (*daimonion semeion ¯* ) that opposes the undertaking of wrong actions.18 The inner voice, however different the contexts of Socrates and Gandhi might be, appeared to be a powerful guide and important compass for Gandhi as well. Most clear were Gandhi's thoughts about this "Voice of God, of Conscience, of Truth, or the Inner Voice or the 'still small Voice'" in the discussions about his fasts in 1933, when even his old adversary from South Africa, Jan Smuts, tried to stop him with an appeal for "old friendship's sake and for the great causes you have championed so successfully" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 55, pp. 120–22).19 Gandhi, however, listened to his inner voice and started his three-week fasting anti-untouchability strike.

In his last article, Gandhi paraphrased Socrates's famous view that death can only be a good thing, because it is either the highest form of sleep—and that is a blessing—or it is a journey to another place where he will meet Orpheus, Hesiod, Homer, and others (Plato 2017, *Apology* 41a). When Socrates concluded "that this one thing is true: that nothing can be bad for a good man, either alive or dead, and his affairs are not ignored by the gods" (Plato 2017, *Apology* 41c–d), Gandhi rendered it as: "Believe it as a truth that no good man can come by evil either in life or after death. Such a man is never forsaken by God. And you may be sure that the man of truth is always happy" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 229). He reinforced the element that the outcome of a battle—life or death—does not matter for the man of truth, *a satyagrahi*. It is in the hand of God. How closely connected and how inspirational Socrates's views were is demonstrated by Gandhi in his "Triumph of Truth" celebrating the agreement with General Jan Smuts one week after his release from his (first) prison term: "He (the *satyagrahi*) will give no thought to success or failure. He is pledged only to the great task of serving Truth, doing his duty in the name of God. The outcome itself is in the hands of the Lord" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. 61, *Indian Opinion* 8.2.1908). Here, Socrates, Gandhi and *satyagraha* are amalgamated.

Gandhi "saw something of himself in Socrates whose life had been a long *satyagraha* against a society entrenched in error and prejudice" (Gandhi 1958–1994, vol. 8, p. VI). Inspirational for Gandhi was the fact that Socrates followed virtue to the end, practiced his precepts, adhered to the traditional religion but fought the corrupt elements of it, and above all that he did not desert his post, his duty in life. He was prepared to die for it. Though it is too short-sighted to establish clear oppositions, in which Daniel represents the religiously motivated ideal of how to live in opposition to unjust laws and Socrates how to die, Socrates returned in later writings and speeches of Gandhi with a strong emphasis on the way he handled suffering, dying, and death.20
