Gandhi: A 'Mahapurushya', not a 'Mahatma'

Come October 2nd, we are all glad that it is a national holiday. Most of us know that it is also the birthday of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. It would be unwise to expect the common men of India to swear to take an oath to live their lives by Gandhian principles on this 'holiday'. But what is reasonable is for us to at least remember Gandhi, the ideals that he stood for, and have a constructive discussion about his principles and his way of living. Hence, this article aims to provide an unbiased opinion of Gandhi.

The point that I would like to focus on, in this article about Gandhi is the apparent lack of knowledge about Gandhi. People in India can be classified into broadly two types:

1. Those who know nothing about him, but idolize him equivalent to God just because someone told them that he was a great human soul (Mahatma).
2. Those who know all the wrong things about him (propagated mostly through unverifiable sources) and claim to hate him, either because they want some attention or because they are tired of hearing all the good things about him.

What is shocking is that most of these people never seem to consider him human: he is either a 'Mahatma' or a 'Stubborn-Prick'. Why can't people think of him as a human: a normal human being with flaws but courage and determination enough to stand up against the British empire through an unusually effective strategy: non violence?

Another common myth that is quite prevalent among the youth of India - especially post 'Rang De Basanti' and 'The Legend of Bhagat Singh' - is that, Gandhi was someone, who in spite of having the opportunity to save Bhagat Singh from being hung to death, chose not to. The truth is way more complicated than that.

One can understand that Gandhi did make attempts to talk to the then viceroy, Lord Irwin[1], but the viceroy was unmoved. Lord Irwin remarks, "As I listened to Mr. Gandhi putting the case for commutation before me, I reflected first on what significance it surely was that the apostle of non-violence should so earnestly be pleading the cause of the devotees of a creed so fundamentally opposed to his own, but I should regard it as wholly wrong to allow my judgment to be influenced by purely political considerations. I could not imagine a case in which under the law, penalty had been more directly deserved"[2]. It is obvious from verifiable references that Gandhi had made his best attempts to save Bhagat Singh, but people would rather choose to believe in conspiracy theories of what 'could have been'.

There are more horrible accusations against him about his 'Brahmacharya Experiments' and his stubborn nature, but on a deeper personal thought, one can make out that these accusations - whether or not they have credibility - are rather desperate attempts to make people hate Gandhi.

Summing it up, I personally believe that Gandhi was a great human being - no, not a Mahatma, but a Mahapurushya. And, rather than hating him for no reason, if people would give time to read some books of history, they would understand the magnitude of his contribution. It is sad that we forget all that and claim to hate him for no apparent reason. Yes, very sad!

References:

[1] http://www.quora.com/Mahatma-Gandhi/Could-Gandhi-really-have-saved-Bhagat-Singh-if-he-wanted-to

[2] http://www.flonnet.com/fl1808/18080910.htm