The lost ashes of Mahatma Gandhi
Decades after his death, the descendents of Mahatma Gandhi are still struggling to fulfill his last rites. It was 60 years last month since he passed away. the Mahatma’s ashes were separated and came into the hands of many different individuals and organisations.
March 24th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
1. Gandhiji’s Atma may rest in peace. His good things will remain always good, we must inculcate them. We must remember, he was too a mortal being like us. So wrongs are part of it. His wrongs we will teach us lessions, not to repeat them again.
2. What saddens me to see, today Gandhi is merely a word. There is hardly anyone who practice the good, he practiced and preached. If Nathuram killed him one time physically, his name-users in Nehru clans and Congress kill him everyday. They kill him for what he stands for- non-violence, truth, value, morality and many other good things.
3. Let we don’t ignore such a great Manishi of Bharat. We may like or not like many of his actions, but we can’t ignore his good things. Good will remain always good and they will inspire others.
4. We have the duty to liberate Gandhi from the crutches of its million killers. They kill him every day, for their personal benefits and they pretend they are his best defenders. Using his surname, a clan stooped to such low level that they can hurl any vulgairty, who don’t accept them as leaders.
5. We must create a disclaimer, MK Gandhi has no blood relation to Nehru-clan Gandhi Tag holders. That way we can save the true Gandhi, liberate him from the crutches of fake surname users.
6. I end with a quotation of Gandhiji, which is as relevant today as it was in his lifetime:
“It is impossible for me to reconcile myself to the idea of conversion after the style that goes on in India and elsewhere today. It is an error which is perhaps the greatest impediment to the world’s progress toward peace … Why should a Christian want to convert a Hindu to Christianity? Why should he not be satisfied if the Hindu is a good or godly man?”
Harijan (30 January 1937)
Bharat
====
March 25th, 2008 at 7:24 am
After the negative stuff that has bin said about sikhs on the forums i will give props were is due
one thing i don’t understand is why ppl hate on mahatma gandhi especially hindus, he inspired nelson mendala and martain luther king, he was a hero to these two men and these two men followed gandhi that got the justice in america and south africa
also his non violence movement wasn’t about sitting their and taking shit, the point behind it was to show no fear but also to show that indian were more human then the british, usually two things happen when attacked ppl run scared or fight back to defend themselves from fear, gandhi’s non violence movement was to show no fear but also to show humanity, if they insult you then ask them to insult you again if it makes them feel better but instead it would make them start feeling insecure
March 25th, 2008 at 7:25 am
gandhi and the ppl who followed inspired african americans and martain luther king, the african americans did the same as gandhis followers
March 25th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Sikh,
Gandhi had his good doings, yet he did do a lot of injustice to us. He also some of his menthods we’re wrong. He didn’t care for freedom fighters who didnt believe in his path. He could have saved heroic people like Bhagat Sing, Sukhdev Thapar and Lala Lajpat Rai, but he DECIDED not to save them, saying it was “better for the Nation”. Also, he agreed to split India up, and break Punjab to bits. None of this is spoken alot, but everyone knows it. This is why I personally hate him, but i also look up to him, because his methods DID inspire other people such as Martin Luther King etc.
March 25th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Sejal, please, learn not to hate. Even Hitler was created by Brahman. Who are we to hate the creation of the Creator? You can learn to isolate a person’s beliefs and actions and person. In doing so you will have a tool to love even those who hurt you. That does not mean to fail to stand up to them, but to accept that we are all in ignorance and trying to find the truth through that maya. To personally hate a historical figure is unjust to that figure - you never met him, you never asked him to explain his actions… Even a contemporary court has trouble deciding truth of contemporary events; we should be cautious of what we glean from the past.
Perhaps I can rephrase what you are saying:
I hate his apparent idea of apeasement without view of consequence, I admire what he brought to the world.
If you insist on hating, then that is what you must do. I hope you can transcend that emotion.
hariaum
March 26th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
The article says:
“The murder took place on 30th January 1948″
What a shame that the author chooses to devalue this heroic act of patriotism by terming this as a simplistic and mindless act of murder.
A simple murder? It certainly was not.
More appropriate here was the word “assassination”, for this was a political slaying of a man who was not only now a danger unto himself with regards to his Muslim policy, but was putting India in grave danger of surrender to Islamic rule. The Mahatma’s era had to be brought to an end.
I do not set out take away that which Bharat says.
Sikh, the Mahatma is not hated in the spirit in which you may perhaps suggest. Indian Nationalists (and it would be nice to have you on our side) bow to his preaching’s even today, and will balance their “right of centre” philosophies with his teachings of peace and tolerance. That which you flag in Para 3 was of that era, and is an in-operable philosophy today.
I note the varying views expressed here, and believe that on balance, Gandhi Ji did more harm than good to India in the long term, for which we may yet have to pay the “ultimate price” .. as “the beginning has started”.
I do not support the now defunct “saintly” sentiment expressed here. Sejal speaks with strength of youth, and such voices must be nurtured, assisted in freedom of mature thought free of agenda of any personal beliefs so that young people formulate independent thinking powers and get away from the cripplingly moderate teachings of Gandhi Ji, and of those who so advocate.
If one feels love, in this case her love for India, then an emotion of hate is as equally correct in reverse towards someone who in her view has harmed our matrubhumi.
A political absurdity born of yesterdays impotence - that of which to love someone who hurts you.
She does not set out to hate him personally as a human being, but his policies of the day and its dire consequential effects today. I see nothing wrong there as she balances her emotion satisfactorily in saying “but I also look up to him”.
Perhaps I am having a bad day.
March 26th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
To be non-violent and support violent ways was not his Dharma therefore he could not support Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose or anyone else.
No man is perfect. He tried his best.
Whatever has happened is for good.
Instead of moaning about what is now done and dusted;
its time to look to the future and build a stronger, better India.
March 27th, 2008 at 12:02 am
Gandhi may have been responsible for long term Indian problems, but he was the one to lead British troops out of India.
Ultimately, the best way to look at him is as a human being, having done good and bad things. Take away what good things he had and try to correct the harm he did.
You have to understand the past to understand the present, but don’t let it way you down.
There’s not really much else to say, honestly.
Keshav
March 27th, 2008 at 1:21 am
sikh please check his partition time speeches to see the kind of advice he was giving Hindus and Sikhs, and you will know why many Hindus disagree with him.
Also he refused to acknowledge that non violent agitation was just one of the tools and it may not always work, like when he adviced the Jews to sacrifice themselves to the last person to stop Hitler, i mean what the hell was the guy thinking, that same strategy was tried by early Tamil leaders in Srilanka before it was crushed and the conflict turned violent.
Oh and if you think Hindus are biased, then read Ambedkar’s views on him (no friend of Hindus) here:
http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00ambedkar/ambedkar_partition/index.html
Or check out Gandhi’s collected works which contain all his speeches full of nonsensical advice to Hindus, like saying that we should all be killed to the last person because only our Muslim brothers are doing it.
Also the man was a clear racist against Blacks, you might say times were like that, but it was in similar times that Savarkar one of the early Hindu nationalists wrote quite clearly in his book Hindutva, that all of humanity is one.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
As his Dharam goes, he was a Hindu. In this context, his faith must not be confused with his political philosophy of the time, that of non-violence, which had nothing to do with “his Dharma”.
It was because of that political policy he refused support for our warriors, while Jinna & co. along with his Muslim league smiled quietly at the gullible Mahatma and plotted for the creation of an Islamic motherland for themselves.
His decision not to support our yodhas like Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose and others during that era can be looked at that of being treason in modern day thinking as Indians re-evaluate and re-judge the Mahatma’s actions.
He took those actions in good faith at that time, also did a lot of good too, and nobody can take that away from him.
He was indeed imperfect with an array of flawed policies .. he did try his best, but for the good of the Muslims, not for the Indians.
Whatever has happened is most certainly not for good - he and Nehru have left us a legacy of a disaster in our political inheritance; And in addition to that disaster, the current “Islamic Communal Congress Party”, adding insult to injury!
I do not believe people here are moaning. Far from it. Out of all the various articles being debated here on various topics, one maintains the hope that some good may come out of it .. none is visible yet, and I think that things must get worse in India first before they starts getting better.
March 27th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I am afraid my understanding of the Gita suggests that Sejal and Pravin have missed an important phrase:
“Three qualities form the fundamental basis of all Aasuric or demonic natures. They are Kama, Krodha and Lobha (lust, anger and greed). They destroy the self and foster the demon in man. They have to be overwhelmed and overcome by the divine qualities of Vairagyam, Santham and Thyagam (detachment, equanimity and renunciation). They are the warriors to rely on in this fight. Foster these warriors and they will, in a trice, wipe out the forces of demonic influence. Any trace of the foes, Kama, Krodha and Lobha, left unsuppressed anywhere is a potential danger; so they must be reduced to ashes. That leads to real success in the struggle for the goal.”
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: Fearlessness; purification of one’s existence; cultivation of spiritual knowledge; charity; self-control; performance of sacrifice; study of the Vedas; austerity; simplicity; nonviolence; truthfulness; freedom from anger; renunciation; tranquillity; aversion to faultfinding; compassion for all living entities; freedom from covetousness; gentleness; modesty; steady determination; vigor; forgiveness; fortitude; cleanliness; and freedom from envy and from the passion for honor—these transcendental qualities, O son of Bharata, belong to godly men endowed with divine nature.”
sri-bhagavan uvaca
kama esa krodha esa
rajo-guna-samudbhavah
mahasano maha-papma
viddhy enam iha vairinam
“The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: It is lust only, Arjuna, which is born of contact with the material mode of passion and later transformed into wrath, and which is the all-devouring sinful enemy of this world.”
all from Gita
Whether you agree with or disagree someone’s choices, if you are attached it leads to passion, to hatred, to self destruction. I hope no one is on that path, or at least everyone is trying to get off of it.
hariaum
March 28th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
“I am afraid my understanding of the Gita suggests that Sejal and Pravin have missed an important phrase”.
No. Not so. Unlike you, we are talking about pure raw politics. There is no lack of clarity in our minds as you appear to imply.
There is neither room here, nor an interest on my part in relation to your defunct philosophy, extinct since the end of the dinosaur, your “saintly” “state of mind” and your sermons para 2 & 3 on the philosophies of your understanding’s of the Gita .. that conflict is in your mind, and for you to deal with.
As for your wish to share such thoughts with others, if you must, is your democratic right on such a platform, that right which perhaps others would begrudge you, and want to take away from you enforced ultimately by imposition of Islamic Law.
You probably think in your mind of un-enlightened minions like me, within the terms of that Gujarati saying which goes: “Ghadeda pase Bhagwat wanchwa jevu che”. I would suggest that the feeling is mutual.
It was because of such “twisted” thinking in favour of Muslims that Sri Godse was obliged to apply the “final sanction”.
As regards to your apparent knowledge and ability to on-pass your knowledge of The Gita, I would be happy to sit in and listen to your lectures as long as you limit that to faith.
As regards your correlation of such sermons as you preach in relation to the deadly dynamics of the politics of attacks and jihadi upsurge that you set out “to love”, you need urgent professional help.
I will probably regret writing this tomorrow, and wish I had bitten my tongue.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:06 pm
1. More than mere reading, it is practice of Bhagavad Gita (BG) teachings which is important. And one have to take into account BG in its totality. Merely following (in fact wrongly following) one aspect and transformed into a coward in the name of non-violence, would not serve any purpose.
2. In modern times, Lokamanya Tilak advocated that action (karmayoga) was the real message of BG. Gandhi, however, interpreted that action without expectation of fruit (anasaktiyoga) was the essence or quintessence of the entire work.
3. Gandhiji was a regular reader of BG, and he even translated It. Then, why did he failed to practice? His practice of BG, seems to me, was confined to find peace/solace in himself. Thats wonderful. But as a leader of the Congress, he remained deluded. He could not overcome the delusion of Chapter One of BG (Arjuna VishadaYoga). Arjuna could overcome the delusion, as he had the Master Krishna (Guru, Advisor), while Gandhi could not as he had no Master to guide. Gandhi’s problem was, he himself transformed into a larger than life image, and that ego has overtaken his conscience. This is my feeling, its beyond our ability to judge the past without thorough research. History will judge his rights and wrongs, whether one like or dislike.
Gita according to Gandhi
http://members dot aol dot com/jajnsn/
4. I look BG in its totality and I think that should be the way to look into. Our life has a cycle from life to death and then death to life (till the time, we unite with the Paramatma). So, BG should be looked from beginning to end and end to begining. Then only, one can practice it balanced and fruitful way in a materialistic world.
Bharat
====
March 30th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Unlike by blunt, and sometimes brutal posts here where I let diplomacy slip into second place, the finesse with which Bharat explains in para. 1 is a breath of fresh air.
I hope that “Pandit” Navin will read carefully what Bharat has to say, and where he could then, perhaps, “self-restraint” his zeal where he introduces such inapplicable ambiguities as above where he sets out to preach, which not everyone appreciates.
March 30th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Since when have I said don’t fight back?
Since when have I said I am a pacifist?
I agree whole heartedly that the Gita should be understand as a totality; though I am far from being able to do so. Probably most of you are better Gita interpreters than I.
But look back at your comments.
I am arguing that hatred is what should be stopped in ourselves. You seem to be arguing that hatred is to be justified. If hatred is justified in the Gita then I need to be referred to that set of lines. You have taken an important part of hinduism, self realization by control of negative tendancies - attachement and hatred - and attempted to say it is not applicable to your beliefs. It is a fallacy to believe that hatred leads to justice. It is a fallacy to believe that the Gita promotes inaction. IT IS A FALLACY TO BELIEVE THAT THE GITA IS IRRELEVANT TO THE MODERN CIRCUMSTANCE. It is a fallacy to believe that because I believe in no hatred that I condone tamasic silence.
We need to be better first for our search for truth/brahman but then also so we can act justly. Arjuna did not lay down his bow at the end of the Gita. He picked it up. Because he failed to understand the Gita is why he laid down the bow and thus needed to be taught it. But it is with the faith in Krishna, Krishna’s teaching, and with the understanding of how the world is that Arjuna PICJED UP his bow and fought with vigor on the field of justice, the field of kurus (dharmashetra, kurushetra). So it is us who must, without anger, without attachement, see that world as it is and then pick up our bow of wisdom and information and education and economics and military… the bow of our karma to protect what is right with the world.
In this I may extend too far: Perhaps the hatred you are justifying is blinding you to who your friends are. Only when hatred is removed can rajas become satvic. So do not hate. Learn and then act justly. But I “am but a poor player that frets and struts his hour upon the stage and then shall be heard no more”, yet you are the future.
hariaum
March 31st, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Why should we be worried about Gandhi’s ashes?
At the hidsight India would be better off if Gandhi would be successful in his law-business in South Africa and did not bothered to go back to India to live on Birla’s money.
He has distorted the Swaraj movement and created the monster of the Muslim agrressions in the name of Khilafat movement on 1919-20.
His non-cooperation movement lasted only 6 days in 1930. He himself withdrew from it.
His Salt-March was a total failure.
His August movement of 1942 lasted 4 days; he himself withdrew from it.
It was a British-Birla propaganda that Gandhi using his nonviolence means gave the leadership pof the freedom movement. Gandhi used to expel anyone from the Congress who wanted to demand independence. He by some copu became the Dictator of the Congress party without an election suddenly in 1919 only 5 years after he came back from South frica and since then he never allowed anyone to challenge his dictatorship.
Nathuram Godse was the best friend of Gandhi; he made Gandhi a martyr.
Otherwise nobody would give a monkey about him today.
Infact in India most people do not care about him at all; but only the British admire him as through Gandhi British can prove their greatness.
April 1st, 2008 at 12:22 am
Please point out to me where in the Gita it says it is ok to hate.
hariaum
April 4th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Here in America people look at Jefferson who raped slaves as the father of the country. Here MLKing is being paraded about as a christian saint that changed the world. In Burma people are asking how is it that a person like MLK existed. Yet in this hindu community people argue that hatred to Gandhi is justified. This is absolutely rediculous. If you want to see what is dragging down hinduism, it is not that muslims are attacking, that christians are attacking, that communists are attacking. It is that hindus create an environment in which their own are denigrated, the worst thinking is supported (hatred), and the intelligent, worldly, and spiritually motivated persons are aliented out of the religion. It is because hatred is spewed as legitimate that christian and islamic religions are wrong. If hindus believe that hatred is justified, which I have never seen in any scripture of ours, then it is better for a seeker of truth to walk away from what is called hinduism.
hariaum
April 6th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
Navin-
1) You’re right. Hate is not sanctioned in our scriptures.
2) To say that Muslims and Christians are not dragging down the Hindu community is silly. I don’t think you meant that and we can forget about it.
3) My main point - there is a difference between hating Gandhi and pointing out the obvious flaws in his ideology as it was practiced. That too, seems to be now, simply beating a dead horse, but it is not hate that motivates it.
It is simply cause and effect.
April 7th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
I respect Gandhiji as a saint and a good human being. After the independence he should have stepped down as saints/good humans and politics don’t mix.
April 9th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
1. Gandhi is now history, forgoten history. Sonner we forget the better for the nation. Those who use his name, abuse him the most. Gandhi word has become a liability for the nation. The main point, Gandhi is no role-model for todays Bharat, howsoever big and great he was.
2. We must inculcate the patriotism of Swami Vivekananda, braveness of Netaji Bose, sacrifice of Bhagat Singh and firmness of Sardar Patel. They were the true personalities, which will inspire us to sustain and progress.
3. Gandhi can’t be a role-model for 21st century world. The world we live are not ideal, but real. Gandhi’s pacifist ideology can’t protect us from another partition or another Chinese invasion, or European colonialism. We must be realist, and not carried away by emotions.
4. There is a new book: Critique of Gandhi, by M.M Kothari, Critique Publications, pp 210.
Review Excerpts:
The author feels that the social, political, economic and moral life in post-Independent India contains the legacy of the delusions of a philosophical life cherished and foisted on the people of India by Gandhiji. He asks, “What was wrong with Gandhiji? Why did he fail on all fronts?” While trying to answer these questions, his regret is that neither Gandhiji nor his admirers went deep enough in their search for explanations.
Talking of spiritual delusions of Gandhiji, the author says that when Gandhiji failed to find a suitable guru, he decided to go ahead and take saintly vows, adopted the loincloth and assumed the role of a guru himself to guide others in spiritual as well as secular matters While he was struggling mid-stream, the gullible Hindus conferred upon him the title of ‘mahatma’ which only spoiled him further. He began to claim he was a chosen instrument of God and created a halo of divinity and infallibility around himself. His spiritual claims turned out to be hallucinations.
The author criticises Gandhiji for remaining in an experimental mood regarding any issue, be it non-violence or sex control.
Referring to ethical delusions, the author says that Gandhiji had delusions about ‘Truth’. He considered himself a 20th-century edition of Raja Harishchandra “and his entire ethical endeavour invariably carried with it an exaggerated self-confidence in an unfailing efficacy of his spiritual powers—something that he did not possess.” Gandhiji projected a saintly image and remained involved in politics for nearly five decades with the ambition to bring heaven to earth, claims the author.
He further states that since Partition and its aftermath had shaken the faith of the people in the “mahatmahood of Gandhiji”, he was now desperately anxious to retrieve his former popular image. Fasts, threats, tears and all other similar gestures of his later days were only “stunts in the direction of rehabilitating himself as a mahatma.” The author feels that Gandhiji believed that he would achieve anything by spiritual powers, but he never possessed any such powers. He failed to understand that nature, scope and limits of what goes in the name of spiritual powers. Here every failure bewildered him.
Dr Kothari ridicules Gandhiji’s political thoughts which he considers as his most serious delusion. He says Gandhiji found India a fertile ground for experimenting with the fancies of Hind Swaraj (his book). Dr Kothari also criticises Gandhiji’s concept of swaraj.
In trying to dispel the halo of divinity around Gandhiji, Dr Kothari has come out with his own interpretations of Gandhiji’s moves and actions which fail to succeed in justifying his statements.
(Critique Publications, 985, 5th Umed Hospital Road, Jodhpur-342 003.)
Enjoy.
Bharat
====