The Man of the Millennium by Joe Mannath In his last years, the great Albert Einstein had only

one picture in his officethat of Mahatma Gandhi. He considered Gandhiji the greatest person alive. In fact, some of us may remember that the movie Gandhi quoted these words of Einstein in one of the opening scenes: Future generations will scarce believe that such a one as this in flesh and blood walked the earth. Who was Mahatma Gandhi? What can we learn from him? India will probably be one of the countries where he is least known and followed. We have streets and statues in his honour, but havent we largely thrown out his example and his message? And yet, he is, without a trace of doubt, the Indian most known and admired around the world. Part of the reason for the neglect is the rank corruption which has distinguished the ruling classes in India, for whom Gandhiji was a convenient name to quote now and then, but a very, very inconvenient model to imitate. How can those who have made themselves rich and powerful at the expense of the people want to have anything to do with someone whose worldly possessions amounted to his khadi dhoti and shawl, sandals, spectacles and a watch? On January 30, 1948, the Friday he died, Mahatma Gandhi was what he had always been: a private citizen without wealth, property, official title, official post, academic distinction, scientific achievement, or artistic gift. Yet men with governments and armies behind them paid homage to the little brown man of seventy-eight in a loincloth. The Indian authorities received 3,441 messages of sympathy, all unsolicited, from foreign countries. For Gandhi was a moral man, and a civilization not richly endowed with morality felt still further impoverished when the assassins bullet ended his life. Mahatma Gandhi was the spokesman for the conscience of all mankind, said George C. Marshall, United States Secretary of State. (Louis Fischer, in The Life of Mahatma Gandhi). Here are a more quotations about Gandhiji, from people who were not easily impressed by fame and power. In the evolution of civilization, if it is to survive, all men cannot fail eventually to adopt Gandhis belief that the process of mass application of force to resolve contentious issues is fundamentally not only wrong but contains within itself the germs of self-destruction. (General Douglas MacArthur, supreme Allied military commander in Japan) British Attorney General, Sir Hartley Shawcross called Gandhiji the most remarkable man of this century. I know no other man of any time or indeed in recent history who so forcefully and convincingly demonstrated the power of spirit over material things. (Sir Stafford Cripps) How did Mahatma Gandhi win such deep respect from leaders, against whose rule he fought most of his life? Through his moral integrity. Through his courage. Through a life lived out in transparent commitment.

Through original and timely re-interpretation of age-old doctrines, to which he gave new and radical meanings. One such idea was ahimsa, or non-violence. Gandhiji extended it to mean active and loving service. Its meaning, as he intended it, is not at all what many take to be a Gandhian stand. For him, the opposite of ahimsa is not violence, but cowardice. He said: I would rather risk violence a thousand times rather than the emasculation of a whole race. When once a group of villagers ran away in the face of police brutality and came to Gandhiji, saying they had not resisted, since he had taught them ahimsa, he said: I hang my head in shame. If you could not defend your families and homes in a peaceful way, you should have defended them violently, but never run away. The worst course, according to him, was cowardice, not violence. In fact, he would say that there was greater chance for a violent person to become non-violent than for a coward. And, with typical humility, he added that for years he did not appreciate ahimsa, since he was a coward. Is this how we understand the Mahatma? His stand on this, as on other matters, is clear and forthright: One has to speak out and stand up for ones convictions. Inaction at a time of conflagration is inexcusable. In fact, he never believed in something else that is falsely attributed to him, namely, passive resistance. He insisted that he never taught passivity. Without a direct active expression of it, non-violence, to my mind, is meaningless. Nothing worthwhile is every achieved without direct actiona belief that Martin Luther King would learn from Gandhiji. Such an interpretation of ahimsa demanded deep love and great courage. You are no satyagrahis if you remain silent or passive spectators while your enemy is being done to death. You must protect him even at the cost of your own life. How many leaders can say these words that Gandiji could speak with utter honesty? I hate privilege and monopoly. Whatever cannot be shared with the masses is taboo to me. He did not think of his life of poverty and service as a burden, but as a joy. Mine is a life full of joy in the midst of incessant work. In not wanting to think of what tomorrow will bring for me, I feel as free as a bird. Gandhiji readily admitted his limitations. I have no university education worth the name. My high school career was never above the average. I was thankful if I could pass the examinations. With honesty and a sense of humor, he writes: I have been known as a crank, faddist, mad man. Evidently the reputation is well-deserved.