Sara lee rosenberg biography of mahatma gandhi

  • This articale on the amazing
  • India at 76 Years: What Was Gandhi’s National Vision?

    August 15th, , marked the seventy-sixth anniversary of India’s independence and so it might be asked: what was Mohandas K. Gandhi’s vision for the vitality of a democratic India? Gandhi himself wanted no part of the “vivisection of India” when the British Raj was partitioned into Pakistan and India. He decried “my life’s work is over” when he witnessed the murder of hundreds of thousands during partition. Still, he still did not give up on peace. The fate of India was in the hands of two men whose minds could not be reconciled: Muhammad Ali Jinnah, leader of the Muslim League, and Gandhi of the Indian National Congress. India might have remained one country, but that did not happen.  

    Gandhi, holding to unity so dearly, was murdered by the Hindutva-inspired fanatic Nathuram Vinayak Godse. Hindutva is an ideology inspired by opponents of Indian religious unity, such as V.D. Savarkar, whose nationalism centered around Hindus while excluding Muslims. This divisive spirit of Hindutva still haunts India today, and no doubt Gandhi would be restless to challenge it.

    India’s independence and Gandhi’s life were celebrated in Richard Attenborough’s film Gandhi, released in  It starred Ben Kingsley as the Mahatma, who gave an Academy-Award winning performance. The film portrays much accurately, but not everything. In it, Gandhi shouts to an angry Hindutva-inspired crowd: “I am a Christian, and a Hindu, a Moslem, and a Jew.” Gandhi did indeed say these words, but it was when his biographer Louis Fischer asked him about a portrait of Christ in the wall of his home. Gandhi had a unique way of affirming all religions, that “God is Truth,” which transcended but also captured the whole family of earthly religions. We are all children of God, in Gandhi’s eyes, celebrating the divine differently. Gandhi believed that “religions are different roads converging on the same point. Wh

    John Pavlovitz's Post


    “When I despair, I remember that all through history the way of truth and love have always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they can seem invincible, but in the end, they always fall. Think of it—always.”
    7K
    Nancy Clark Helsel
    It's so hard to think positive when so many people have been converted to insanity.
    47
    Nadir DeLima
    It is true that everything passes but when a society loses its moral compass, it is not only tyrants and murderers that fall but an entire civilization!
    43
    Betty A Kirkpatrick
    Today, I listened to Mahalia Jackson, John Lennon, Cat Stevens, Luther Vandross, Sarah Vaughan and Josh Grobin. I am determined to find peace and stop crying. I will succeed.
    38
    Sharon Whitehurst
    Thanks for giving us hope, John. I hope one day decency and kindness will be in vogue again. And that we will actually elect officials who want to make this country a better place instead of trying to wreck people's lives and steal as much as they can …
    36
    Barbara Dallas Sutton
    Thanks! Gandhi‘s perspective is helpful.
    We’ll stay true to the nonviolent path of Jesus…. the way of courage and compassion.
    26
    Dawn Woodward
    Also, regardless of what was happening, Gandhi took a day off every week for silent retreat. He understood the importance of that because of his spiritual training
    18
    Top fan
    Kay Jean Harris Wilson
    They are way overdue to fail in this time in history

    The Man Who Met Gandhi and Hitler

    What did a man, who encountered both Gandhi and Hitler, say about the prospects of non-violence?  The comparison is startling, but at least one journalist covered both persons: William Shirer.  Hitler is regarded by many as the most concrete incarnation of devilry ever seen.  Dr. E. Stanley Jones said that “one of the most Christlike men in history was not called a Christian at all.”  He was Gandhi, a Hindu.  For Christians, this is an eye-popping and controversial statement, yet there emerges from this juxtaposition a serious question: what is the role of non-violence, and more specifically pacifism, in the world today?  Reinhold Niebuhr, while admiring Gandhi, was also very critically aware of the strengths and limits of non-violence.  Pacifism was even heretical, according to Niebuhr’s standards.  So, what did Shirer have to say about these two men who, in moral terms, could not be farther apart?  And how does this inform our ideas about non-violence and war?

    On February 23, , William Shirer was born.  Though best known for his book The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, he also produced a biography of the father of modern India, Gandhi, A Memoir.  Shirer came away from meeting Gandhi deeply moved, writing that the experience taught him the comparative equality of world religions.  He also believed, however, that there might be a limitation to Gandhi’s non-violence.

    There is a commonsense approach to this debate.  Just as we evaluate the weather each day, putting on a warmer coat or bringing an umbrella in response to the meteorological circumstances, we must also be able to evaluate the political climate to gauge if non-violence is practicable.  Reading weather conditions is certainly easier, but two of the most famous advocates of non-violence, Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., were also aware of this question.

    First, what did Gandhi sa

  • “An integrated view of
  • Soulmates: The Story of Mahatma Gandhi and Hermann Kallenbcah

    Related papers

    The Tension and Coherence of Love, Identification, and Detachment in Gandhi’s thought

    Sanjay Lal

    Mahatma Gandhi intended for the concepts of universal love and identification with all living beings to be seen as compatible with the traditional Hindu ideal of detachment (sannyasi). This is problematic given that love and identification entail very real degrees of psychological attachment. After showing the significance my project has for the attempt to implement Gandhian principles in everyday, social, and political life, I give an overview of Gandhian thought in my first chapter. This overview demonstrates the plausibility of Gandhi's ideas to philosophical Western readers. Then, in chapter 2, I explore the basis Gandhi saw for conjointly advocating love, identification, and detachment given his overall philosophical and religious background. Again, I endeavor to illuminate Gandhi's thought through careful comparisons to familiar Western thinkers and traditions. In chapter 3, I explore the tensions among the three concepts that are explored and how they might be resolved. I aim to reveal, using the dominant methods of Western philosophy, logical consistency in Gandhi's thought regarding love, identification, and detachment. In chapter 4, I defend my favored resolution of these tensions, namely that atman, the Universal Self is the only proper object of attachment. In particular, I defend the resolution against feminist concerns regarding the place of particularity in genuine moral concern (love) and show that Gandhi is capable of overcoming such concerns in spite of his advocacy of universality, impartiality, and detachment in moral judgments. By drawing parallels between Gandhi's religious universalism and his call for universal moral concern, I show that he is quite capable of valuing particularity while emphasizing universal moral concern. In chapter 5, I summariz