Gandhi’s Kama Shastra   Leave a comment

The other day I was reading an article in most favourite saturday newspaper – TOI Crest – about the father of the nation, and after what I read, I didn’t want to write father starting with a capital ‘f’. he might be deserving it, yet for me, he didn’t. So I found the article online and quote from it.

Here are some excerpts from the article that managed to disturb me. (It is an interview by Neelam Raj in Times of India Crest, of Jad Adams whose new book – ‘Gandhi: Naked Ambition’ has recently released in India)

[The next stage of his life engaging with sexuality was to increase his contact with women and girls, including physical contact. He certainly saw this as behaviour which would help strengthen him spiritually and, thus armed, he would better be able to act in India’s cause…..]

[Gandhi had a normal married life from his teens to his thirties when he decided to be chaste, and finally, in 1906, made a vow which settled the matter. The next phase of his life saw him ordering everyone else to be chaste as well, including newlyweds. At his ashram, men and women were housed separately, yet he encouraged the young to bathe and sleep together. “I sent the boys reputed to be mischievous and the innocent young girls to bathe at the same time,” he boasted, explaining carefully to them they were not to succumb to temptation. If ever they strayed, the vigilant Gandhi himself would adjudicate. He was of the view that people who wanted to fight for the nationalist cause in his service “have to observe perfect chastity, adopt poverty, follow truth and cultivate fearlessness”.]

[It is literally a matter of definition whether Gandhi was chaste or not. If chastity is taken simply to mean no penile penetration of another person, then Gandhi was chaste. If we use the term ‘sexual relations’ to refer only to the act of intercourse, then he did not engage in sexual relations. However, he did frequently put his hands on women, sleep naked with women, bathe with women and take massages from them. Most people would think of these things as sexual.” He took the censure of others over his sexual experiments as a sign that he ought to continue, as a further challenge to his spiritual nature. He explained, “If I stop sleeping together for all time it will mean that I have been mistaken. Otherwise why should I stop it? There is a limit to abstaining from it for the sake of my friends.” He was a very brave and also a very self-confident man.]

[Sleeping with one, then two teenaged girls (Manu, his 18-year-old grandniece, and then Abha, the wife of Gandhi’s grandnephew Kanu Gandhi) was behaviour that continued into 1948, when he was killed. I should mention that the women who gave him service were always willing; there was no shortage of people ready to do whatever Gandhi wanted, without question.]

[“It is the duty of every thoughtful Indian not to marry,” said Gandhi. “In case he is helpless in regard to marriage, he should abstain from sexual intercourse with his wife.” With sex not permissible even for procreation, wouldn’t it have been the end of the world as we know it?]

Now, all the while since I was born till the now, I and my family including my son and my folks have bowed to such a martyr. He was a simpleton who kept emphasizing on the virtue of simple living and high thinking.

He was called the naked fakir by the firangs that ruled us for 200 years, and the title ‘Mahatma’ was ordained to him by ‘thakur’ from the land of the great Ganges – Pandit Rabindranath Tagore – and that is how millions address him even today. I wonder how our kavi guru would feel if he happened to know this Gandhian kama shastra?

What would you and I call a person who is mature, who has a wife, is blessed with kids, is “actually” taking massages and sleeping nude with wives of others?

‘Pervert’ would be an understatement, isn’t it?

Why is there a difference if it is Gandhi? Because he managed to save his own blood and sacrificed the blood of millions of innocents, in the name of his so called Satyagraha and Simon go back movements.

His message an eye for an eye makes the whole nation blind is a slogan that’s by heart of everyone since grade 5.

He had a great deal of security, fan following, and he lured millions with his sweet coated bitter tongue. He was a preacher according to me and he practiced only as much as he could, that is, if he felt he should.

He laid down great examples of the saints and the prophets of the ancient, to argue, but how much did he follow them? I read that he carried the Bible-the word of God for millions of the Christian faith and of course of other faiths also, any one who believes in Jesus knows the word of the new testament by heart. Need less to say, does it look from any angle that he even believed in Jesus? I feel that the bible fell in the wrong hands, in the hands of one who preaches, but doesn’t practice.

The holy bible says-

22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said,
“This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of man.”
24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

Matthew 5:28 NIV
But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Now tell me, why would a man and as elevated as Gandhi want to sleep with his grand-niece and the wife of his grand nephew?

Because of his so called experiments with the truth? Isn’t that ridiculous? A man of his standing, a public figure who had millions of desi as well as videsi devotees?

What difference is there now between a pervert and the pious Gandhi? Is there any difference between a man who puts posters of naked women in his bedroom and the Mahatma?

He loved the idea that he’s being worshiped all over the world, so he decided that he would like to make a preachy bible of his own, in his own words, justifying just about every wrong that he’s doing. It’s like we say that there are people who believe killing people in the name of God, in other words we call them terrorists, so did this old man, sorry the ever-green man; with his belief in experimenting with his truths. He knew exactly in his heart what he was upto and splashed dust into the eyes of his devotees by his blasphemies of experiments.

Would you call a saint, a modern one of course given their attachments towards drugs and women and fame and last but not the least their names beginning with a sri? Sri in hindu religion refers to a respected one. I will answer this with a strict no. Then why respect Gandhi?

Tell me what did he achieve by making men and women of his ashram sleep together, and men and women who were not husbands and wives to bathe together? Was he a porno movie director?

Oh! He adored nudity, loved to watch those ripe mangoes beneath a wet white sari, dripping droplets of water from those wet black strands of hair, the little dew drops on that dusky skin, what could be more appealing to a man? To go deeper beneath the sari and grab a glimpse of the divine woman in the nude, of course in the name of experiment darling!

Lust not respect is what he had in his heart for several if not all women, otherwise he wouldn’t name them so openly, given the Indian conservative background and the sexual stains that would tarnish these women for decades and centuries to come.

He preached that it was the duty of every thoughtful Indian not to marry.

I ask why?

If marriage is so bad then my parents, their parents and their ancestors and your parents, your ancestors and gandhi’s parents and gandhi’s ancestors and gandhi’s children and their grandchildren are bloody thoughtless Indians who don’t understand their duty. But, what tamasha he did was an exalted form of duty-tarnishing his own name and respect, hurting the sentiments of some few million followers, tarnishing the names of these poor women who never knew Gandhi would reveal their identities in his writings.

I don’t understand what I would say to my son if he said that engaging with women and young girls would strengthen him spiritually and would help him in a national cause? What would you say as a parent? Or as a child if your father said the same thing to you? Better what would you say to your husband who believes in such delusions? I guess you’ll have to take him to the nearest well trained psychiatrist.

Buddha, the first master, left his wife, son, his royalty for spirituality. If he stayed in his huge palace in luxuries sleeping besides a beautiful wife, would he be able to attain the enlightenment that only he attained in his time, the world never had a second Buddha. He is hallowed and his teachings are followed with reverence worldwide.

I am not comparing anyone with Buddha. But as far as for me, I am ashamed and hurt after knowing all this about Gandhi.

What are we looking forward to with millions of Gandhi followers who read this book and then his own writings ?

Will they take these experiments of his to their hearts and start experimenting themselves on the Gandhian roads? If such is the case we are truly threatened, for I follow Gandhi, my family does and so many other men do.

Was Gandhi’s vision for an India – a “Perverted India” that had been turned on the bad road by Gandhi himself?

Image Source : Jad Adams Website
Bible quotes : Biblica


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: