The "Total Revolution" Movement (1974-75) in India led by J.P.Narayan (called "JP" for short) was a very remarkable movement in the sense that it involved a unique theory and practice of changing the individual and that it led to the collapse of the Congress Party government, which had continuously been in power since Independence. JP's role in the formation of the Janata Government by leading the "Total Revolution" Movement has been generally acknowledged in the sense that he was protecting Indian democracy. But the idea of "Total Revolution" itself, which aims at changing the individual's behavior and thinking, has been judged negatively as being too fanciful. In this paper the author attempts to take a new look at the idea by attaching importance to the inner logic of why JP hammered out his theory and thus reevaluate the "Total Revolution" Movement as a whole. Though the "Total Revolution" Movement is in fact an extension of the "Sarvodaya" (uplift of all) movement inherited from Gandhi and Vinoba Bhave, research up to now has generally ignored this point, which can only be understood in the context of Indian society and the background of the movement's ideas. JP's movement has usually been dismissed as a mere "political" movement. This paper discusses the strategy of the "Total Revolution" Movement and its efforts at social reform. It also tries to clarify the movement's historical meaning, emphasizing the above-mentioned "inner logic." In the first place, concerning strategy, in contrast to Vinoba, JP emphasized the aspect of "resistance" to government and extended the village-centered movement of Vinoba into the cities and drew new revolutionary power from the intelligentsia, students, and other young people. It was largely as a result of this that JP's movement showed such a big upsurge. As for the practice of social reform, in this case the establishment of "Janata Sarkar" (people's government), which JP advocated after noticing how Vinoba's "Gramdan" (donation of villages) movement had become more form than reality, Sarvodaya activists very often entered villages and tackled the establishment of "Janata Sarkar". But although we may sympathize with JP's assertion that changing individual mind-sets is in-dispensable for meaningful, long-term change in Indian social structure, we may still be forced to say that the social-change aspects of his movement were more a failure than a success, since they obviously needed more time for fruition. However, it is also a fact that in the process of joining the movement a lot of people were awakened to their inner power and changed themselves in substantial ways. If we disregard this fact, we will not be able to understand the full significance the movement had. A final point to be stated in relation to the reasons for the collapse of the movement is that JP did not continue to pursue its revolutionary direction in a real sense and changed it into an "opposition political party" movement. JP should have been more thorough in driving home the sort of grass-roots democracy seen in the "Janata Sarkar". Or he should have personally taken a share in power after Indira Gandhi's ouster. Yet he did neither. His concepts surely had (and have) potential, and many no doubt wish he could have realized them more fully during his lifetime.