India without Gandhi

Innumerable books have been written on Gandhi, both in India and abroad. Gandhi himself was a prolific writer and his writings and speeches published by the Government of India run into a hundred volumes of about five to six hundred pages each. He wrote practically on every subject under the Sun except perhaps on Accounts, Maths and Finance. Most of the works on Gandhi are in his praise and a very few writers have dared to critically examine his ideas in depth.

There was a time when it was considered a taboo to say or write anything against Gandhi. One or two books did come out but they were quickly banned. Critique of Gandhi by Dr MM Kothari attempts to highlight the contradictions in Gandhi’s views on some fundamental issues. This small volume of 200 pages is divided into three parts: ethical, spiritual and political delusions of Gandhi. Under this broad division, the subjects covered include: truth, non-violence, sex, glorification, role of revolutionaries, communal problem and partition etc. One thing that comes out of this book is that Gandhi was obsessed with moral values and particularly non-violence.

Dr. Ambedkar

For Gandhi, “Truth without non-violence is non-truth” (Young India, 17th September, 1925). Thus, in Gandhi’s view Mahabharata never occurred and Kurukshetra is only in the heart of man; so also the violence that took place in 1947 because it does not satisfy the definition of truth. When at some point of time he was asked to clarify the concept of truth Gandhi replied, “It is what the voice within tells you” (Harijan, 31st December, 1931). Which voice is to be taken as genuine? Gandhi answered, “What a pure heart feels at a particular time is truth” (Harijan, 22nd February, 1942). How difficult it is to locate a pure heart the reader can well imagine.

According to Dr Kothari, Gandhi not only confused himself but also others who came into his contact. In this connection Kothari quotes two examples: A hunter pursuing a fox asked Lord Bertrand Russel as to which way the fox had gone. Russel told a lie and the life of the fox was saved. Russel remarked: “I do not think I should have been a better man if I had told the truth.” Gandhi, however, did not approve of Russel’s view and said, “No one is bound to answer a question. Russel could have refused to answer it.” But elsewhere Gandhi wrote, “Not only telling lies is untruthful but guilty silence or hiding one’s state of mind is also untruth.” (Harijan, 9th June, 1946).

Mosley in his book The Last Days Of The British Raj, London, 1962, records that at the end of one meeting with Gandhi, Lord Wavell, the Governor General of India, said, “He spoke to me for half an hour and I am still not sure what he meant to tell me. Every sentence he spoke could be interpreted in at least two different ways. I would be happier were I convinced that he knew what he was saying himself but I cannot even be sure of that.” (Page 11 of the book).

Annie Besant with Gandhi

At the Ramgarh session of the Congress in 1940 Gandhi had said, “I am your General.” Until his death Gandhi continued to act as a General or dictator of the Congress. There is no doubt about Gandhi’s dictatorial behaviour. His contemporaries in the Muslim League had expressed similar views.

In this context, Beverley Nichols, a distinguished British journalist in his book, Verdict on India, London 1944, quotes a Muslim League’s article titled ‘Nationalism in Conflict in India’:

“Hitler commands the same respect and allegiance in Germany as Mr Gandhi in India. He is more than a hero, a national saviour, or even a God to the Germans. The same is the case with Mr Gandhi. He is both a spiritual and political leader of the Hindus and pretends to speak with divine authority. Nobody can dare to criticise him and yet remain a member of the Congress. A host of Congress leaders had to leave the Congress as they had incurred the displeasure of the Mahatma. Mr Nariman, Dr Khare, Mr Subhash Chandra Bose, Mr Roy and Mr Rajagopalachari, all at one time held positions of immense influence in the Congress, but their difference of opinion with one man alone in the Congress, Mr Gandhi, led to their permanent expulsion.” 

Gandhi hated the British. And in his fight against them, he tried to bring unity between the Hindus and the Muslims. It is this obsession for unity which induced Gandhi to lead the Khilafat movement in 1920, a patently anti-national and an anti-Hindu act. The movement’s failure led to the Moplah riots in Malabar (Kerala) which resulted in the butchery of Hindus in thousands. Sir Sankaran Nair and Miss Annie Besant squarely blamed Gandhi for this massacre.

In Miss Besant’s words, “It would be well if Mr Gandhi could be taken into Malabar to see with his own eyes the ghastly horrors which have been created by the preaching of himself and his loved brothers Muhammed and Shaukat Ali.”

Sir Nair wrote, “For sheer brutality on woman, I do not remember anything in history to match the Malabar rebellion.” (Gandhi and Anarchy by Sir Sankaran Nair, Tagore and Co., Madras, 1922).

Sir Chettur Sankaran Nair
Sir Sankaran Nair

And yet Gandhi had the audacity to praise the Moplahs, the killers, for being, “amongst the bravest in the land. They are God fearing.” (Young India, 8th September, 1921). After this the cycle of riots engulfed the entire country and Hindus suffered the most.

About the callous attitude of Gandhi, Dr BR Ambedkar wrote, “He has never called the Muslims to account even when they have been guilty of gross crimes against Hindus.” (Thoughts on Pakistan by Dr BR Ambedkar, Bombay, 1941). Dr Kothari quotes Bose about the poor performance of Gandhi at the Round Table Conference held in London in 1931. In Bose’s words, “He talked very humbly. His proneness to confess his ignorance in intricate questions of finance or law lowered him in the estimation of British public. They felt that India was being led by a man who was fit to be a bishop.” (Page 177 of the book).

Qaid-e-Azam Jinnah also had a very poor opinion of Gandhi. In 1920, Gandhi had invited Jinnah to participate in the non-cooperation movement. Jinnah in reply wrote, “I am fully convinced that it must lead to disaster. Your methods have already caused splits and division in almost every institution that you have approached…not only amongst the Hindus and Muslims, but between Hindus and Hindus and Muslims and Muslims, and even between father and sons…” (Page 180 of the book). Jinnah also ridiculed Gandhi’s spiritual claim.

He wrote to Gandhi: “There is so much in your article which is the result of imagination. It is partly due to the fact that you are living a secluded life at Segaon, and partly because all your thoughts and actions are guided by ‘inner voice.’ You have very little concern with realities or what might be termed by an ordinary mortal practical problems.”

Jinnah with Gandhi

Frustrated with Gandhi’s obsession with matters spiritual, Jinnah is reported to have observed, “To hell with his (Gandhi’s) inner light.” (The Last Days of the British Raj by Leonard Mosley, London 1962). Gandhi held a series of meetings with Jinnah in 1944 at Bombay on the question of Pakistan. Jinnah told him in no uncertain terms that Muslims wanted a separate homeland and were prepared to make any sacrifice to achieve it. Gandhi did not agree as he suffered from delusion. Result: the Muslim League launched Direct Action which led to the Great Calcutta Killing of 1946. Muslim League’s demand for Partition also envisaged exchange of populations. Gandhi, as usual, displayed his obstinacy and did not ask Muslims of India to leave for their Darul Islam.

The British in their wisdom had agreed to the division as that was the only way to solve the Hindu-Muslim problem. Gandhi brought it back. No wonder Dr Kothari begins his book with a quotation from Arthur Koesther: “India would be better off today and healthier in mind without the Gandhian heritage.”

~ by KR Phanda, excerpts taken from book titled CRITIQUE OF GANDHI, By MM Kothari


Click here to post a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • A brave article indeed. Please do not stop sharing such material. Let dogs and pigs bark, It will only bring more attention.


  • Fantastic article. It’s an eye opener. Many people here revere Gandhi without knowing his true face. Please bring out the facts without worrying about the protesters.

  • I deeply admire the informative & wholesome reading that you provide also giving the ory

  • very good article …..back it up with facts and that will clear all the doubts .

  • Hi, I am trying to locate a copy of critique of Gandhi book. Not able to find it anywhere online. Can you point me if I can get a copy of this?

  • Now this one is one of the great articles…. an eye opener for fool Gandhi followers…

    He tried to prove himself a God..
    Indians were dying in poverty, losing life in partition, fighting hard for freedom, at the same time our so called “Mahatma” enjoying his desires on the name of “experiment”.
    what a shame!! we forget our heros and celebrate Gandhi jayanti..
    he is responsible for the poor condition of hindus not only in India but in Pakistan also.

  • This article has thrown light on the darker side of Gandhi unknown to most people. It has enlightened us by portraying the true image of Gandhi which lay hidden under his hypocrite and superficial image which we all believe as the spiritual personification. He is often ridiculed at for his ambiguous thoughts and it is only recently that he has become the object of criticism for his inhuman Bhramahachari experiments. This revealed out facts has eventually affected my thoughts regarding this great Mahatma and sometimes I become skeptical about his true intentions. Nevertheless, I still revere him for expounding the thoughts of Satya and Ahimsa which became the foundation of our freedom struggle.

    • Do not Revere him for nothing. He and nehru were just low life scums. He was no saint who professed about Satya and Ahinsa. It was just a gimmick. He is the culprit for the hangings of Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev and the deaths of several innocent and good soul Hindus.
      So dare you respect him for anything. May his soul rot in a corner in hell forever.

  • Never read about gandhi from ambedkar.
    a. Gandhi never torched any books , but this ambedkar in 1927 torched 2lakh copies of Manu Smriit
    for a simple reason he wasn’t able to digest what was written in it.
    his halfbaked knowledge in sanskrit made him do such a thing

    b. He voiced against the useage of Hari Jaan..
    What is Hari Ka jaan = Gods own people?

    c. Ambedkar wanted the division of india The unholy nexus of ambedkar, Naiker and Jinnah
    all the three including nehru

    Whether Gandhi was a spiritually correct or political incorrect is a dead matter now..

    About the oppertunist material mind ambedkar expounds his very mind in page 11. He expects a person like gandhi to convince him.. ah!! this very fellow ambedkar failed to know that its upto one to get convinced or reject.
    I would safely decline Mr. ambdekar comment on gandhi for a simple reason that he was a confused man. he jumped like a macaque from poll to poll without proper knowledge.
    The unholy nexus of RS.Naiker, Jinnha and ambedkar is clearly written in Breaking INDIA.
    Jai Hind (Stand United as One family – Vasudaiva Kutumbakam)

  • I totally agree with Sree Dharmi. People following Ambedkar are the ones which still demand reservations; despite giving free basic education and free mid-day meals. These people are responsible for their own state; they allow themselves to be exploited and give their rights for just Rs.10/-
    We all are paying price of Ambedkar’s book on Constitution and real talent in our Country gets wasted or lost to other countries.
    I never had any respect to Gandhi -since I was 11 yrs old. My Father kept all information about Gandhi, Bose and other freedom fighters and found on one hand; we have handful of fighters which have shaken roots of British people and have successful in taking revenge of death of their own country men; On other hand I have Gandhi who is pushing people to give their LIFE.. without any fight!!!!
    I have gone through books of various religions; but no religion teaches such thing.
    Only Shri Subhash Chandra Bose seems to be logical in this fight for freedom.

    I would say, Atomic bomb on Japan changed everything; else Shri Bose would have routed out British with help from Japan.

    Lastly, if Bose would have survived, Gandhi would not be matter of Concern.

    Jai Hind!!!!

  • Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah were the 3 traitors that destroyed India !!! All 3 should have been shot many years earlier, and we would have been left with a proud United India !!!!!

  • Nobel Prize Winner Shri.V.S.Naipaul in his boo “India A Wounded Civilization” correctly wrote that the incident which occurred in South Africa where Gandhiji was thrown out of a train was the main reason why, on his arrival in India, he started working against the whites. Naipaul has also written that on his return to India, conditions were some how favourable for a person like Gandhiji to lead a mass movement as the Khilafat movement was already gaining momentum among the fanatical Muslims and Gandhi utilized their unrest by linking the freedom struggle with Khilafat. Gandhiji wanted only sycophants around him and independent thinking persons like Subhas Bose had no place in his scheme of things. The so called “Satyagraha” would have been crushed once and for all had he practised the same in Stalin’s Russia, Hitler’s Russia and why even in South Africa under apartheid rule. The British were very benevolent rulers and hence they tolerated all these idiosyncrasies . Sarvashri.Rajagopalachari, Sardar Patel and even Jinnah had agreed for the complete repatriation of Hindus from present Pakistan and Muslims from present India. Gandhiji and Nehru were the main opponents of this scheme and we are paying for the folly of these leaders even today – the latest being ISIS flags getting hoisted in J & K and youngsters wearing Pakistan jersies in Kerala

  • We, the Hindus of this subcontinent and particularly the Hindus left-out in the two parts of Pakistan, have been suffering for the last century due to the evil inheritance of Mr. M.K. Gandhi and his bizarre arrogance. Mr. M. K. Gandhi’s so hyped greatness (or conscious misdeeds?) was responsible for the painful deaths of so many innocent individuals (including Muslims) of this subcontinent. He should have been prosecuted for awarding justice due for his role in the deaths of so many human beings. But, alas!

  • You don’t need any well-read people to write about this man. My Grandmother used to say ‘ Gandhi vandu kadara vittan’ meaning Gandhi came and screwed everything up whatever the british did to bring modernity to india like turning on the light switch brings light. But Gandhi switched the light off and took India back 200 years.

  • What I fail to understand is that 95% of the people I have spoken to about gandhi have nothing but vile to spew. Than if that is a true figure of anti gandhis across the nation or even if it is a single number above 50%… Than why don’t the government seek redundancy of gandhism in India. The first and foremost step in that direction would be removal of gandhi from the currency bills and replacing him with BAGATH SINGH, RAJGURU! SUKHDEV, SC BOSE, ETC.
    This means that government printing out bills with a traitor on them must have some influence somewhere.