[world-vedic] "MAHATMA"??? GANDHI

[Guest guest]

Dear Dinker Charak

 

You wrote:

> If you mailed this part refering to title f the book, then I think things

> are bit confused. As I understand (please correct me if I am wrong) the

> above experiment meana a person is doubting the truth and trying to

> experiment on it to prove if it is really true or not. The book's title

> (again, please correct me if I have misunderstood) I think refered to

> experiments he did on himself and his life that made him realise the truth

> of non-violence.

 

Gandhi may think that non-violence in politics is truth. He did not

factually understand.

Non-violence and politics go ill-together. Thus he *mislead* the people.

Bhagavad Gita the first glance is Arjuna fighting on his chariot with

Krishna on a violent battlefield. Krishna did not say to Arjuna "Ok Arjuna

you sit down and wear bangles and sari I, Krishna will fight the war".

Gandhi himself died by violence. So Gandhi's "truth" was a failure. Gandhi

misintrepreted Bhagavad Gita he was trying to show non-violence through it.

 

You wrote:

> But again, I don't want to digress from the thing I wanted to say in my

> mail. Let us get over with mindless adoring and also abhoring of Gandhiji

> and stop blaming him for all good or bad.

 

Its *constructive analysis* that we are concerned with: not so much aborhing

Gandhi.

We *have to learn* lessons from history. Many Indians to this day are

worshipping a photo of a man who made severe mistakes. His blind acceptance

of non-violence costed many thousands their lives. And clever manipulating

politicians in full view of public put flowers (just political propaganda to

be elected by the blind public) on his photo.

 

731230mw.la Conversations

Prabhupada: Well, in politics, unless there is violence, you cannot take.

Simply by sweet words, not possible. That was the difference between our

political leaders, Mahatma Gandhi and Subhash Chandra Bose. So Subhash

Chandra Bose was of opinion that--and that is a fact--that "You are

agitating non-violence. These people will never care for your non-violence.

Unless there is violence, so these Britishers will never go away." So Gandhi

would say, "No, I am not going to accept this violence theory. I shall

continue." So for thirty years... He started from 1917 and up to '47, the

Britishers did not go. But when Subhash Chandra Bose, he saw... He took the

political power. He became the president. But Gandhi was angry. So because

he was old leader, out of respect, he resigned the presidentship. Then he

though that "So long this man will live, there will be no independence." So

he went out of India and joined with Hitler, and Tojo, Japanese.

Nitai: Who went out of India?

Prabhupada: This Subhash Chandra Bose. And he organized the INA, Indian

National Army. So when this Indian National Army was organized and the

Britishers... They were great politicians. They saw, "Now the army is going

to national movement. We cannot be." Then they left. Because it was not

possible. They were maintaining British Empire with Indian money, Indian

men. You see? They did not conquer by their British soldiers all round the

Far East, Burma and the Mesopotamia, and the Egypt. That was Indian army,

the Sikh soldiers and the Gurkha soldiers, and Indian money. On the pretext

that "For Indian protection, we are maintaining this army." Actually, they

were expanding their empire. Africa, Burma. And when they saw that "India is

lost," voluntarily they liquidated all others. Went back... Back to home,

back to Godhead. (devotees laugh) So in politics this is nonsense,

non-violence. It is nonsense, cowardism. In politics in sweet words you

cannot get. There must be fight, arms. That is army. "If you don't agree,

then fist." That is politics. There must be violence. Otherwise you cannot

control. When there is educated good men, then you can argue. But when

people are ruffians, there is no question of good... Argumentum vaculum, I

told you the other day... (break) ...in the beginning of creation, the fight

between the demons and the demigods, devasura-yuddha. That is always there.

In the European history, without revolution, no order changes. Even the

Russian Revolution was there. French revolution was there. In England,

Cromwell? Cromwell? Cromwell Revolution?

Nara-narayana: Yes.

Prabhupada: Yes. So without revolution, (indistinct), you cannot change old

order. "Old orders changes giving place to new." That old order changes...

Everywhere it is by violence. The Mahabharata also, the Battle of

Kuruksetra. Krsna was there. He tried to settle up. But it was not settled

without violence. Paritranaya... What is that? Vinasaya ca duskrtam.

Paritranaya sadhunam vinasaya ca duskrtam. Krsna also comes, vinasaya ca

duskrtam, to, for killing the demons. Krsna also comes.

of a man who was on all counts

 

770215ed.may Conversations

Prabhupada: If I require, I'll take. So Gandhi discovered, and the discovery

was there Surendranath Ban... That they're exploiting us, so noncooperate.

They are ruling over us by our cooperation, so let us noncooperate." But

that is a foolish policy. Poverty-stricken country, how they can

noncooperate? That was not successful, but this program, Subhash Bose's

tit-for-tat, military, that was successful. They're keeping our men as

soldiers and police, and by their strength they're ruling over India. And

Subhash Bose made a plan--the soldiers and police will noncooperate. They'll

join his INA. And when they began to join Indian National Army, these

intelligent Britishers could understand, "Now it is no more possible. With

whose cooperation, we shall kick?" Then they made a friendly settlement.

Friendly means "Divide it so that they'll perpetually fight, and let us go."