ABSTRACT
Mahatma Gandhi was familiar with the terrorist movement. Unlike many other critics of violence, Gandhi advances a novel epistemological argument against it. In his view the use of violence implies a belief in absolute and infallible knowledge. For Gandhi non-violence 'requires far greater bravery than swordmanship'. He agrees that violence is 'more manly' than cowardice, but insists that it is 'less manly' than non-violence. Almost right from the beginning the Indian attitude to violence has been characterized by a deep and healthy ambiguity. Most Hindus regarded violence as an inescapable fact of life and approved of its use in certain situations. By international standards the Indian terrorist movement was fairly sober and restrained. It was never attracted by the doctrines that glorified violence as a law of nature, or a 'blood bath' that cleansed away the psychological 'muck of the ages', or as the highest expression of human energy and freedom.
