Commemorating the 156th birth anniversary of the great soul (the Mahatma) I had written the article “The Man Who Impressed Even Einstein”. In this article I had mentioned how the greatest scientist in history was impressed and inspired not by another great scientist but by the simple unassuming life of the Mahatma who walked barefooted and scantily clad in the plains of India braving the unrelenting heat in his fight against the colonial might of the greatest empire on which the sun never set.
While it is undeniable that the life and light of Mahatma Gandhi transcended boundaries and influenced people of all genres all over the world, it is also true that there had been people who were not at all impressed by him whatsoever and rather considered him disgusting, a misfit and disgrace to humanity itself.
Today I wish to delve into the attitudes that two great personalities of the 20th century had towards the great Mahatma. These two figures were contemporaries of Gandhi and towering personalities in their own rights and also two of the most famous leaders who lived alongside Gandhi on planet earth during the first half of the 20th century. Their influence and impact on the 20th century world was so powerful and dramatic that today’s world would have been very different without them. But unlike Albert Einstein who was very impressed and inspired by Gandhi, these two towering personalities of the 20th century viewed Gandhi with disgust and hatred with such intensity that they did not mince words either in private or public.
The first of these two is none other than the iconic Mr. Winston Churchill considered by many to be the greatest prime minister of Great Britain. Churchill served as prime minister of Britain from 1940 to 1945 and then again from 1951 to 1955. Winston Churchill stood for all that the British Empire represented. He was well-do-to, aristocratic, proud, arrogant and unwavering in his commitment to the great English nation and its people. He totally believed that people like the Indians were sub-humans who were not capable of ruling over themselves and as such should be ruled over and enlightened by the great European nations.
Churchill and Gandhi met for the first time on November 28, 1906 in South Africa. Churchill was then the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies and Gandhi was a lawyer and spokesman for the rights of Indians in South Africa. The meeting was to discuss legislations affecting the Indians. In this encounter, Gandhi was dressed in a suit and tie and so probably his appearance did not offend Churchill. This meeting is said to have ended amicably and cordially. At that time Gandhi was relative unknown and as he was dressed like an Englishman Churchill probably did not think much of Gandhi and dismissed him as just another backward English educated Indian barrister trying to be obedient subject of the British colonial mechanism.
But by the time the 1930s rolled around, everything had changed and Mahatma Gandhi was now not only the undisputed leader and symbol of the Indian freedom movement but also one of the most famous and influential leaders in the entire world. And by now Gandhi no longer wore suit and tie and roamed around like a British subject and he no longer practiced law to earn an income. By now Gandhi wore his own self woven loincloth and shawl and walked around barefooted and was recognized around the world not just as a freedom fighter but as the symbol of nonviolence and passive resistance.
When Gandhi attended the Second Round Table Conference in London in 1931, he did not bother to change his appearance in order to represent his people in a European country. Rather, he chose to attend the conference just like he would have attended any other conference, meeting or public rally here in India. So he represented his country in that international conference scantily clad wearing his own self woven clothes exposing almost half of his body and legs.
When the great Winston Churchill saw Gandhi walking up the steps of the Queen’s palace wearing his cheap loincloth exposing half of his naked body, Churchill could not take it anymore. And Churchill described Gandhi as a “seditious middle temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half-naked up the steps of the viceregal palace”. Churchill also refused to meet Mahatma Gandhi.
These comments and sarcasm of Winston Churchill were all over the news. But Gandhi responded to Winston Churchill’s “half-naked fakir” comment by embracing the label as a compliment, stating he would be a fakir “too naked” and would take the expression as an honor to represent his humble origins and people.
The other powerful personality of the 20th century who did not have any regard and respect for Gandhi was none other than the Garman dictator Adolf Hitler. Hitler was someone who believed in violence, armed conflict, military might and forceful subjugation of others. But most of all Hitler was someone who believed in racial purity and racial superiority and he did not believe that all men are equal.
Thus it is not a surprise that someone like Adolf Hitler would obviously hate someone like Mahatma Gandhi who believed in the equality and dignity of all men.
One month before the outbreak of the Second World War, on 23rd July 1939, Gandhi wrote a letter to Hitler addressing him as dear friend and appealed for peace and avoidance of war. In his letter, Gandhi told Hitler that of all the leaders in the world, the one who held the power to avoid global war was Hitler and therefore told him to save the world from another catastrophic war.
Then again on 24th December 1940, when the world war was in its full rage, Gandhi again wrote to Hitler and appealed to his conscience to save humanity by desisting from all insane violence and aggression. There is no record of these two letters of Gandhi ever reaching Hitler. And if it did ever reach him also, there is no record of Hitler ever replying or responding to these letters from the great soul.
Hitler expressed extreme contempt for Mahatma Gandhi and his nonviolent resistance movement, viewing it as a joke and an insult to his worldview. During a 1937 meeting with a British envoy, Hitler reportedly suggested a brutal formula for dealing with the Indian independence movement. He said “Shoot Gandhi; if that isn’t enough then kill the other leaders too; if that isn’t enough too, then two hundred more activists, and so on until the Indian people will give up the hope of independence”.
In 1936, Hitler claimed at a rally that the British had “taught Indians how to walk”, demonstrating his racist view of Indians as racially inferior.
Obviously one cannot expect someone like Hitler to have any respect or regard for Gandhi as the two held totally opposing views on humanity and the solution to the world’s woes.
Gandhi is revered today the world over as a Christ like figure who impacted humanity in a unique and unparalleled way. He was deeply touched and inspired by the teachings and philosophy of Jesus Christ and he tried his best to implement these teachings and philosophy in his fight against injustice, oppression and racism everywhere. Though he never officially became a Christian, he was the one who resembled Christ the most and his life was more influential than the many Christian missionaries who went around teaching the gospel trying to convert people to Christianity. Just like the apostle Paul influenced and changed the world with his letters and writings, Gandhi also, though officially never a Christian, was able to influence and change lives by walking on the footsteps of Christ and spreading the philosophy of Christ by the way he lived his life.
But it is said that you may be the kindest, the most loving, the most empathetic, the most humble and the most generous person in the world, but you will always be the bad guy (the villain) in somebody’s story. So it is no surprise that Gandhi, though considered a saint and champion of truth, justice and nonviolence all over the world, was not appreciated by the likes of Churchill and Hitler. As far as in the stories of Churchill and Hitler were concerned, Gandhi was undoubtedly the bad guy. But does that matter?
But Gandhi was someone who did not mind being the villain in somebody’s story because he had tasted the power of truth and the treasures found in the teachings and philosophy of Christ. So what we can draw from these is that as long as we are impressed and inspired by the truth of God and love for our fellow beings and work with eagerness to enrich God’s kingdom and humanity, being in the bad book of someone does not actually matter.
