In his essay ‘Gandhi’s Imagination of Muslims’, Hilal Ahmed analyses Gandhi’s writings and speeches to understand his views on Muslims as a political category.
In Checkmate: How BJP Won and Lost Maharashtra, Sudhir Suryawanshi writes about why Uddhav Thackeray took it upon himself to secure the future of his family and his party.
In Pharma, Gerald Posner writes about how an unlikely trio working for a small US company called Lederle discovered Aureomycin, a broad-spectrum antibiotic in 1948.
In an essay, compiled in the book The Meaning of India, Raja Rao wrote about meeting Nehru in Germany, taking Evian bottles for his wife and talking about gods.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has no intention of being drawn into another attritional war with Hezbollah. His commanders they are unlikely to win.
Under this model, battery is provided to EV owners on a subscription basis or lease. With more people open to buying EV cars, the lower upfront cost could likely drive wider acceptance.
The armoured platform is India's first amphibious infantry combat wheeled vehicle. Last year, the Royal Moroccan Armed Forces had procured 90 military trucks from the Tata Group.
How come Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and Sri Lanka remain constitutional, democratic and stable despite Islam and Buddhism respectively, but Pakistan, Bangladesh and Myanmar don’t?
1. “Any post-Indira Gandhi Congress style self-declared secular leader might find this passage valuable to score a point over Hindutva bhakts of our times.”
Sir/mam, you are presenting the above statement as quote of Gandhi. I just want to know when did Mahatma Gandhi see any leader of post-Indira Gandhi era.
2. You have mentioned passage (CWMG, Vol. 89, 01 August 1947–10 November 1947, p. 176). but didn’t mention, (CWMG, Vol. 87, 24 May 1947). Why is that?
3. How is calling someone Hindutva Bhakt different that Islamist terrorist?
4. It is request, not a question. I will looking forward to your article on Babasaheb’s view on Islam.(Not you interpretation of it)
Some people consider Gandhi a man governed by love seeking common ground as a plateau to move forward in compassionate peace. All people struggle with shortsighted imperfections yet Gandhi will always stand for forgiveness, kindness and acceptance that supercedes the human condition.
It is easy to look back on his words and actions now and to see fault yet the overall message of Gandhi is to find as harmless as possible actions to unite while celebrating diversity. We are all far from perfect, still who if any of us will take on the burden Gandhi was willing to endure with the purest of heart any mere mortal may exist with? I will. Will you? Gandhi smiles on my troubled soul daily reminding me there is sunshine in all of us if we seek it and if we align with the intent to create peace we will have the most happiness ever known. Let love be the lens we see everyone and everything with and we will be as great as Gandhi.
Thank you for this article. It is the beginning of a conversation rooted in peace.
Looking or consistence in Gandhi’s mass of opinions is like searching or the proverbial needle in the haystack. A grain of gold out of a ton of ore. In 1923, when Swami Shraddhananda was stabbed and killed by a Muslim youth Rashid Ahmed, Gandhi called him a misguided brother. In 1924, in a communal riot in and around Lahore, the Hindus were driven out of their homes and localities by Muslim rioters. At that time he called Muslims bullies, and Hindus cowards. For Gandhi, religion and Hindu Dharma were poltical tools. He was no scholar. Don’t look for consistency in his periodic views.
There’s a serious flaw in the following sentence being in italics as if Mahatma Gandhi said, which is not possible going by history: Any post-Indira Gandhi Congress style self-declared secular leader might find this passage valuable to score a point over Hindutva bhakts of our times. This is the observation of the author, and should be removed from italicising and given separately as the author’s view. Otherwise, Mahatma had been so right in whatever he said.
we don’t need to care what side he took he took a decision neither side benefits…
First – he shouldn’t have dragged the partition to the level of his wish or idealism to a hatred reach to the deep roots of the communities , its the will of the people he would have made Jinnah and Nehru stand together and made public statement we are working on things and people of both sides to stay calm- would have saved 2 million lives.. and 70 years rivalry
Plan and negotiate and divide with sharing common resources like land access to Afghan and other Russian colonies etc ..
They just signed whatever the Cyril Rat(d)cliff decided, he never visited before India – and even not really bothered to go around and visit the Border , it wasn’t English August then in India – he drew a line over the map and declared partition –
worst two of the newly selected not elected PM’s just didn’t bother what is the real issue of moving millions of people along the border – they didn’t learn divide and conquer the work from the british but acted like cookie jar Monkey …
Good thing Pakistanis didn’t worship Jinnah and his family and most of their leaders are patriotic worked for their countries safety – slavery wasn’t in their mind… but we Indians had all selfish mean leaders and nepotism at its core- very few leaders was real planes but they are all short lived..
to sum of all we were fighting shoulder to shoulder against the british , suddenly we are slicing each others throat…reason Gandhi Nehru and Jinnah british took revenge by concealed the real patriot Netahji and create a fight between her former slaves..
Strange selfishness, we tend to dream of a different world standing on a platform contributed by the same individuals who form the very foundation of the platform
Perhaps you see the RSS – those who never fought for the independence of India and on the contrary, sided with the British – as fighters then? If it wasn’t for Gandhi’s ability to mobilize the masses and for the foresight and intellectualism of Nehru and the other passionate fighters, you wouldn’t have been in a position to make such stupid comments, ignorant of history. What people like you fail to grasp is that in hindsight, you’re all the more wise.
Gandhi thought of Muslims as bullies and actually put that down in writing!! Interesting.
It’s beyond doubt that antinational fake dynast nehru and fake Mahatma not only destroyed India but were responsible for killing of >3000000 Hindus. In spite of their heinous acts, the duo is glorified till date. These two rogues have distorted history and cheated Indians by and large.
”Islam cannot be envisaged without violence and the rule of sword.” And Muslims are very fanatic, intolerant, religious obsessed and violent people. Perceptions are based on evidence and that speaks volumes against Muslims.
So in essence writer is saying Hindu God is same as Muslim God and this was also Gandhi’s view. So before we go further let us test it. Can witer who I presume will be person of emminece can he say so in Mecca or even in Jamma Masjid but it would come as surprise that Raghupati raja which includes Ishwer Allah tero naam is being played without any fuss at makeshift Ram Ram janam bhoomi temple.
1. “Any post-Indira Gandhi Congress style self-declared secular leader might find this passage valuable to score a point over Hindutva bhakts of our times.”
Sir/mam, you are presenting the above statement as quote of Gandhi. I just want to know when did Mahatma Gandhi see any leader of post-Indira Gandhi era.
2. You have mentioned passage (CWMG, Vol. 89, 01 August 1947–10 November 1947, p. 176). but didn’t mention, (CWMG, Vol. 87, 24 May 1947). Why is that?
3. How is calling someone Hindutva Bhakt different that Islamist terrorist?
4. It is request, not a question. I will looking forward to your article on Babasaheb’s view on Islam.(Not you interpretation of it)
Thank You.
Some people consider Gandhi a man governed by love seeking common ground as a plateau to move forward in compassionate peace. All people struggle with shortsighted imperfections yet Gandhi will always stand for forgiveness, kindness and acceptance that supercedes the human condition.
It is easy to look back on his words and actions now and to see fault yet the overall message of Gandhi is to find as harmless as possible actions to unite while celebrating diversity. We are all far from perfect, still who if any of us will take on the burden Gandhi was willing to endure with the purest of heart any mere mortal may exist with? I will. Will you? Gandhi smiles on my troubled soul daily reminding me there is sunshine in all of us if we seek it and if we align with the intent to create peace we will have the most happiness ever known. Let love be the lens we see everyone and everything with and we will be as great as Gandhi.
Thank you for this article. It is the beginning of a conversation rooted in peace.
Looking or consistence in Gandhi’s mass of opinions is like searching or the proverbial needle in the haystack. A grain of gold out of a ton of ore. In 1923, when Swami Shraddhananda was stabbed and killed by a Muslim youth Rashid Ahmed, Gandhi called him a misguided brother. In 1924, in a communal riot in and around Lahore, the Hindus were driven out of their homes and localities by Muslim rioters. At that time he called Muslims bullies, and Hindus cowards. For Gandhi, religion and Hindu Dharma were poltical tools. He was no scholar. Don’t look for consistency in his periodic views.
There’s a serious flaw in the following sentence being in italics as if Mahatma Gandhi said, which is not possible going by history: Any post-Indira Gandhi Congress style self-declared secular leader might find this passage valuable to score a point over Hindutva bhakts of our times. This is the observation of the author, and should be removed from italicising and given separately as the author’s view. Otherwise, Mahatma had been so right in whatever he said.
we don’t need to care what side he took he took a decision neither side benefits…
First – he shouldn’t have dragged the partition to the level of his wish or idealism to a hatred reach to the deep roots of the communities , its the will of the people he would have made Jinnah and Nehru stand together and made public statement we are working on things and people of both sides to stay calm- would have saved 2 million lives.. and 70 years rivalry
Plan and negotiate and divide with sharing common resources like land access to Afghan and other Russian colonies etc ..
They just signed whatever the Cyril Rat(d)cliff decided, he never visited before India – and even not really bothered to go around and visit the Border , it wasn’t English August then in India – he drew a line over the map and declared partition –
worst two of the newly selected not elected PM’s just didn’t bother what is the real issue of moving millions of people along the border – they didn’t learn divide and conquer the work from the british but acted like cookie jar Monkey …
Good thing Pakistanis didn’t worship Jinnah and his family and most of their leaders are patriotic worked for their countries safety – slavery wasn’t in their mind… but we Indians had all selfish mean leaders and nepotism at its core- very few leaders was real planes but they are all short lived..
to sum of all we were fighting shoulder to shoulder against the british , suddenly we are slicing each others throat…reason Gandhi Nehru and Jinnah british took revenge by concealed the real patriot Netahji and create a fight between her former slaves..
We are unfortunate to get freedom under Gandhi and Nehuru. Both are not good managers and are very cruel to Hindus. I never accept them as fighters.
Strange selfishness, we tend to dream of a different world standing on a platform contributed by the same individuals who form the very foundation of the platform
Perhaps you see the RSS – those who never fought for the independence of India and on the contrary, sided with the British – as fighters then? If it wasn’t for Gandhi’s ability to mobilize the masses and for the foresight and intellectualism of Nehru and the other passionate fighters, you wouldn’t have been in a position to make such stupid comments, ignorant of history. What people like you fail to grasp is that in hindsight, you’re all the more wise.
Gandhi thought of Muslims as bullies and actually put that down in writing!! Interesting.
Gandhi’s view Dada abdhullah’s treaure
It’s beyond doubt that antinational fake dynast nehru and fake Mahatma not only destroyed India but were responsible for killing of >3000000 Hindus. In spite of their heinous acts, the duo is glorified till date. These two rogues have distorted history and cheated Indians by and large.
”Islam cannot be envisaged without violence and the rule of sword.” And Muslims are very fanatic, intolerant, religious obsessed and violent people. Perceptions are based on evidence and that speaks volumes against Muslims.
So in essence writer is saying Hindu God is same as Muslim God and this was also Gandhi’s view. So before we go further let us test it. Can witer who I presume will be person of emminece can he say so in Mecca or even in Jamma Masjid but it would come as surprise that Raghupati raja which includes Ishwer Allah tero naam is being played without any fuss at makeshift Ram Ram janam bhoomi temple.