[Vision2020] Sexual Revelations about Gandhi Blown out of Proportion (Resent and Explained)

[nickgier at roadrunner.com]

Hi Roger,

I forgot to put in "vision 2020" in my initial posting so when I forwarded it, it appeared as an attachment.

Until the sensational and distorted reviews (in the staid Wall Street Journal no less) of Joseph Lelyveld's new biography came out, I had not publicized my own work on Gandhi's sexuality widely, primarily because it could be easily misinterpreted.  It was, however, published in India in 2007 with only one angry e-mail and only one long distance call.

As far as I can tell initially, this new biography has been misinterpreted.  From my research I'm convinced that Gandhi had sexual relations only with his wife, but very intimate relations with a number of women.  If he had any attraction for men, I would have invited them to his bed as well.  He was insistent that his chastity "experiments" would work only with women!

Now that the misinterpretation of Gandhi's sexuality is world-wide, I decided to make my own work more widely public--not to embarrass Gandhi but to protect him.

Here is my initial post.

Good Morning Visionaries: 
 
I'm glad that the author of the new Gandhi biography has responded quickly, but 
you know that famous quotation about lies going around the earth 10 times before 
the truth catches up (approx.). 
 
It is true that, while in South Africa, Gandhi expressed deep affection for a 
German peace activist, but he certainly did not leave his poor wife for him. 
 
It is also true, sadly, that Gandhi did take advantage of the innocence of some 
young women (and older women who should have know better)in his bizarre 
experiments testing his chastity.  As far as we know, he always passed with 
flying (but not erect) colors. 
 
I've written about this in my article "Was Gandhi a Tantric?" and you can read 
it in various versions at www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/GandhiTantric.htm. 
 
MUMBAI, India — A state in western India banned Pulitzer-Prize winner Joseph 
Lelyveld's new book about Mahatma Gandhi on Wednesday after reviews saying it 
hints that the father of India's independence had a homosexual relationship. The 
author says his work is being misinterpreted. 
 
More bans have been proposed in India, where homosexuality was illegal until 
2009 and still carries social stigma. 
 
Gujarat's state assembly voted unanimously Wednesday to immediately ban "Great 
Soul: Mahatma Gandhi and His Struggle With India." 
 
The furor was sparked by local media reports, based on early reviews out of the 
U.S. and U.K., some of which emphasized passages in the book suggesting Gandhi 
had an intimate relationship with a German man named Hermann Kallenbach. 
 
"Great Soul" has not yet been released in India, so few here have actually read 
Lelyveld's writings. 
 
"The book does not say that Gandhi was bisexual or homosexual," Lelyveld wrote 
in an email. "It says that he was celibate and deeply attached to Kallenbach. 
This is not news." 
 
He noted that his book _ which is said is about Gandhi's struggle for social 
justice and the evolution of his social values _ is available both in the U.S. 
and as an e-book download. 
 
"It should not be hard for anyone to determine what it actually says," Lelyveld 
wrote. " It's a pious hope, but I'd say someone might take the trouble to look 
at it before it's banned." 
 
Several reviews of "Great Soul" detailed its sections on Gandhi's relationship 
with Kallenbach. 
 
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Andrew Roberts said that the only portrait 
on the mantelpiece opposite Gandhi's bed was of Kallenbach. 
 
"How completely you have taken possession of my body," reads one widely quoted 
letter from Gandhi to Kallenbach. "This is slavery with a vengeance." 
 
Britain's Daily Mail ran an article under the blaring headline: "Gandhi 'left 
his wife to live with a male lover' new book claims." 
 
The Mumbai Mirror on Tuesday ran a front page story under the headline "Book 
claims German man was Gandhi's secret love," which quoted the same passages as 
Roberts. 
 
Sudhir Kakar, a psychoanalyst who has written about Gandhi's sexuality and 
reviewed some of his correspondence with Kallenbach, said he does not believe 
the two men were lovers. 
 
"It is quite a wrong interpretation," he said. 
 
Gandhi's great goals were nonviolence, celibacy and truth, he said. 
 
"The Hindu idea is that sexuality has this elemental energy which gets 
dissipated," Kakar said. "If it can be sublimated and contained it can give you 
spiritual power. Gandhi felt his political power really came from his celibacy, 
from his spiritual power." 
 
He said Gandhi often filled his letters, including those to female associates, 
with strong love language, but that did not lead to physical intimacy. 
 
"Nothing happened," he said. "He is telling his feelings, but they are platonic. 
They are not put into action. That would have been terrible for him." 
 
Politicians in the state of Maharashtra, home to India's financial capital 
Mumbai, have also called for a ban on the book and, along with Gujarat's chief 
minister Narendra Modi, have asked the central government to bar publication 
nationwide. 
 
Modi said Lelyveld should apologize publicly for "hurting the sentiments of 
millions of people." 
 
"It has become a fashion to tarnish the image of great Indian leaders for self 
publicity and sale of books," said Sanjay Dutt, spokesman for the ruling 
Congress Party in Maharashtra. "The government should invoke a law to severely 
punish anyone who tarnishes the image of the father of the nation." 
 
Ranjit Hoskote, a writer and general secretary of PEN India, which fights for 
free expression, condemned the ban and said local media had misconstrued both 
Lelyveld's intentions and the nature of Gandhi's relationship with Kallenbach. 
 
"You can't cite a worse example of third hand reportage and comment," he said. 
"How can you ban a book you haven't read?" 
 
He said Gandhi's correspondence with Kallenbach has been available in library 
archives for decades. "There's no secret. There is no scandal," he said. 
 
___ 
 
Associated Press writers R.K. Misra in Ahmedabad and Aijaz Ansari in Mumbai 
contributed to this report. 

---- nickgier at roadrunner.com wrote: 
> WAS GANDHI A TANTRIC?
> 
> By Nick Gier, Professor Emeritus, University of Idaho
> 
> It is now widely known that Gandhi shared his bed with young women as part of his experiments in brahmacharya, a Sanskrit word usually translated as "celibacy," but generally understood as the ultimate state of yogic self-control. 
> 
> Gandhi believed that Indian ascetics who sought refuge in forests and mountains were cowards, and he was convinced that the only way to conquer sexual desire was to face the temptation head-on with a naked female in his bed.
> 
> I take Gandhi at his word that he did not have carnal relations with these women—his sleeping quarters were open to all to observe—so he was not among the "left-handed" Tantrics who engage in ritual sex with their yoginis. Tantrics believe that, under the guidance of a guru and tightly controlled parameters, people can gain spiritual liberation by means of sexual intercourse. 
> 
> Gandhi was not a "right-handed" Tantric either, because this school views the male-female dynamic in symbolic terms only and proscribes intimate contact with women. 
> 
> For Gandhi the virtues of patience, self-control, and courage were absolutely essential to defeat the temptation to retaliate and respond with violence.  Gandhi made it clear that each of these virtues were found most often in women. Gandhi once said that he wanted to convert the woman=s capacity for "self-sacrifice and suffering into shakti-power." Shakti, the power of the Hindu Goddess, is at the center of Tantric ritual and worship.
> 
> The women around Gandhi were amazed how comfortable they felt in his presence.  His orphaned grandniece Manu considered Gandhi as her new mother, and she simply could not understand all the controversy surrounding their sleeping together.  The fact that women felt no unease in his presence was proof to Gandhi that he was approaching perfection as a brahmachari.
> 
> Of the 16 women closely associated with Gandhi, nine were said to have slept in his bed.  Most accounts of Gandhi’s sexual experiments focus on those with Manu in 1946-47.
> 
> Although he conceded at the time that it “may be a delusion and a snare,” he was still confident that sleeping with Manu was a “bold and original experiment,” one that required a “practiced brahmachari” such as he was, and a woman such as Manu who was free from passion. Confessing as she might not even have done with her own mother, Manu told Gandhi that she had not ever experienced sexual desire.
> 
> Presumably because of these ideal conditions, Gandhi predicted that the “heat would be great.” It is not clear whether Gandhi was speaking of yogic heat or the heat of the negative reactions that he anticipated. 
> 
> One has to admire Manu because it was she, not Gandhi, who suggested that they not sleep together any longer.  One cannot admire Gandhi when he said that the experiments ceased because of Manu’s “inexperience,” not because of any failing on his part.
> 
> Gandhi’s "sacred" experiments actually started at his Sevagram ashram as early as 1938, when his wife Kasturba was still alive.  Sushila Nayar not only slept with him there, but also gave him regular massages in front of visitors. 
> 
> Sushila explains: "Long before Manu came into the picture, I used to sleep with him just as I would with my mother. . . . In the early days there was no question of calling this a brahmacharya experiment. It was just part of a nature cure."
> 
> The fact that Gandhi changed the justification for these experiments after closer public scrutiny suggests that his motivation for these actions may not have been as pure as he wanted people to assume.
> 
> In an extremely candid confession, Gandhi admits that at Sevagram he had made a grave mistake: "I feel my action was impelled by vanity and jealousy. If my experiment was dangerous, I should not have undertaken it. . . . My experiment was a violation of the establishment norms of brahmacharya." Gandhi, however, did not maintain his resolve, because shortly thereafter intimate contact with women of the ashram resumed. 
> 
> There is evidence that these activities were having a deleterious effect on the women’s mental health.  There was intense competition among the women for Gandhi’s attention, and several visitors attested to definite signs of psychological turmoil among them.
> 
> Swami Ananda and Kedar Nath, two visitors with substantial spiritual credentials, queried Gandhi as follows: “Why do we find so much disquiet and unhappiness around you.  Why are your companions emotionally unhinged?”
> 
> In conclusion, if we can call Gandhi a Tantric, then it is a very unique nonritualistic, nonesoteric practice combing aspects of both left- and right-handed Tantric schools. 
> 
> It also must be said, no matter how much we want to hold Gandhi in the highest esteem, that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that Gandhi was inconsistent in his justifications for his sexual experiments and not completely sincere in carrying them out. 
> 
> This would then lead one to question whether these experiments were a spiritual necessity or simply a personal indulgence and abuse of power.  If the goal of the true Tantric is to transform sexual desire into something sacred, then personally I am less and less certain that Gandhi achieved this goal.