[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If you'll check the source you'll see that this statement was made by suziezuzie (msilver1951) and that my contribution was to follow with an article discussing Gandhi's passifist views about the Jews. It was Martin Buber who answered Gandhi publicly. Anyone reading Gandhi's comments can see that he wouldn't have minded sending every Jew to the slaughter so he could prove that "ahimsa" was morally superior. > > There is so much post-WWII cultural propaganda that people don't even know that the SS wanted to send the Jews out of Europe by train to their home in Palestine. The British refused this request because they didn't want the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem to lead Palestinian Muslims in rebellion against British colonialism. It is one of the ironies of history that the SS (who took the homes and possessions of the Jews by force) wanted to return all Jews to their homeland and it was therefore British who blocked this from happening (to protect their territorial interests). To this day the British still deny this truth. (See "The Order of the Death's Head" by German historian Heinz Hohne). > > Gandhi's story had now become a westernized cultural hagiography. Western Buddhists (hand in hand with Satyagraha proponents) have been a large part of this effort to portray him as a "saint". > > For my part I take sides with the Jewish fighters in the Warsaw ghetto, who were respected even by the SS. On the other hand, if Gandhi's soul is back on Earth doing the same type of thing again then the Jihadists will slaughter him this time instead of an Indian nationalist. After all, Dar-as-salam (the realm of Islam) has no earthly boundaries. As a Hindu, Gandhi appeared to have taken the opposite view from what Krishna was saying in the B Gita or Shrimad Bhagavatam. I suppose pacifism could be taken as a passive/aggressive strategy to fight the enemy. So, in that sense, Gandhi is taking up his fight from a higher moral ground. > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 8/29/07 6:37:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented > that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest > while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about > this? > > > Should have? Isn't that what they did?Thus the saying *never again*. > > > > > - > Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. > > > > > > - > Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. >
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "suziezuzie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for the article. One of the reasons, I understand, why the > German Jews didn't resist Hitler's plan of extermination was, from my > own experience as a Jew in the US, is that assimilated Jews in the > country that they are raised are more nationalistic than religious. > I'm saying this is true for the majority of secular Jews, not > orthodox, that inhabit a country over many generations. If you were to > ask me, what are you? I would tell you, I am an American first and > really have no feelings about being Jewish. This is the case for the > majority of American Jews living in the US today. When I was living in > Israel for 11 years, I noticed a strong nationalistic of their own > country of origin by those who had immigrated from their home > countries. Those born in Israel (Sabras) naturally felt Israeli > nationalism, not as a Jew, (since Israel is predominately a secular > state) but as an Israeli. > It would be easier to look at it this way: Adolf Hitler and Mahatma Gandhi were polar opposites, with similar agendas. Hitler wanted to establish the "Old Fatherland" of Germany. Gandhi wanted to establish the "Old Motherland of India. Same agenda. Polar opposite agendas: One method, the Gandhi Method, which has inspired other countless people throughout the world, including John Lennon and Martin Luther King,Jr. was God-like, 'in tune with the laws of nature, as Maharishi would say; higher consciousness, etc., transcendence of the ego for a higher cause. One the other hand the Hitler Method, relied on fear and prejiduce against the Jewish people. Hitler claimed the Jewish people had swindled the German masses into poverty, and from the results of the defeat of WWI, and the world-wide depression. Also, he was acting on the wave of anti-semitism, world-wide, also, which included the support from the likes of Henry Ford, Joe Kennedy, and many countries had no sympathy for the Jews; even the United States would not let the Jews escape to this country, very sad dark period... In which the German people as a whole population sank to the depths of depravity, death and demonic, murderous behavior. The Jews, allowed themselves to be decieved to think they could 'rise above' the SS.. and that this phase would pass. They didn't listen to the many signs: they were sleeping. In both cases the leaders relied on the nationalism of the people: In Germany it was to get the country back from the Jews. In India, it was to get the country back from the British. Same cause different means. The Black People in this country have had the fortune of having intelligent people of the white community on their side, to take their side, even if it meant a civil war. Lincoln, and others since then take the way of freedom and liberty. In certain circumstances where the government has been allowed to run amuck, and becomes a police state, dictatorship, with all the military power, etc. It becomes more and more difficult to produce quite the same effect, as in a democracy; For example, remember the guy standing in front of the Chinese tank, during the demonstrations in China; That was put down, and though change has occured in happens slowly. r.g.
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
Thanks for the article. One of the reasons, I understand, why the German Jews didn't resist Hitler's plan of extermination was, from my own experience as a Jew in the US, is that assimilated Jews in the country that they are raised are more nationalistic than religious. I'm saying this is true for the majority of secular Jews, not orthodox, that inhabit a country over many generations. If you were to ask me, what are you? I would tell you, I am an American first and really have no feelings about being Jewish. This is the case for the majority of American Jews living in the US today. When I was living in Israel for 11 years, I noticed a strong nationalistic of their own country of origin by those who had immigrated from their home countries. Those born in Israel (Sabras) naturally felt Israeli nationalism, not as a Jew, (since Israel is predominately a secular state) but as an Israeli. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > suziezuzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented > that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest > while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about > this? > > > Empty Bill helps out boys and girls! > What Did Gandhi Do? > One-sided pacifist. > By David Lewis Schaefer > > In the weeks leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom, American college campuses were plastered with posters asking "What Would Gandhi Do?" The implication, of course, was that the U.S. should emulate the tactics of the celebrated Hindu pacifist who successfully led the movement for Indian independence from Britain. > > The analogy, it should go without saying, overlooks major differences between the two cases. Whereas the 20th-century British were far too benign an imperial power to choose to slaughter peaceful resisters to their rule, there's no evidence that Saddam Hussein, already responsible for the massacre and torture of hundreds of thousands of his countrymen (to say nothing of the many more who died in his aggressive wars against Iran and Kuwait) would likewise have succumbed to friendly persuasion Jacques Chirac to the contrary notwithstanding. (It's not that we didn't try!) > It is interesting, in this regard, to recall how Gandhi himself responded to the evil perpetrated by one of Saddam's role models, Adolf Hitler. In November, 1938, responding to Jewish pleas that he endorse the Zionist cause so as to persuade the British government to open Palestine to immigrants fleeing Hitler's persecution, Gandhi published an open letter flatly rejecting the request. While expressing the utmost "sympathy" with the Jews and lamenting "their age-old persecution," Gandhi explained that "the cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me," since "Palestine belongs to the Arabs." Instead, he urged the Jews to "make that country their home where they are born." To demand just treatment in the lands of their current residence while also demanding that Palestine be made their home, he argued, smacked of hypocrisy. Gandhi even went so far as to remark that "this cry for the national home affords a colorable justification for the German > expulsion of the Jews." > Of course, Gandhi added, "the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history," and "if there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified." Hitler's regime was showing the world "how efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism." Nonetheless, the Hindu leader rejected that notion, since "I do not believe in any war." And for Britain, France, and America to declare war on Hitler's regime would bring them "no inner joy, no inner strength." > Having rejected both the plea that Palestine should be offered as a place of refuge for the Jews and the idea that the Western democracies should launch a war to overthrow Hitler, Gandhi offered only one avenue for the Jews to resist their persecution while preserving their "self-respect." Were he a German Jew, Gandhi pronounced, he would challenge the Germans to shoot or imprison him rather than "submit to discriminating treatment." Such "voluntary" suffering, practiced by all the Jews of Germany, would bring them, he promised, immeasurable "inner strength and joy." Indeed, "if the Jewish mind could be prepared" for such suffering, even a massacre of all German Jews "could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy," since "to the God-fearing, death has no terror." > According to Gandhi, it would (for unexplained reasons) be "easier for the Jews than for the Czechs" (then facing German occupation) to follow his prescription. As inspiration, he offered "an exact parallel" in the campaign for Indian civil rights
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
If you'll check the source you'll see that this statement was made by suziezuzie (msilver1951) and that my contribution was to follow with an article discussing Gandhi's passifist views about the Jews. It was Martin Buber who answered Gandhi publicly. Anyone reading Gandhi's comments can see that he wouldn't have minded sending every Jew to the slaughter so he could prove that "ahimsa" was morally superior. There is so much post-WWII cultural propaganda that people don't even know that the SS wanted to send the Jews out of Europe by train to their home in Palestine. The British refused this request because they didn't want the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem to lead Palestinian Muslims in rebellion against British colonialism. It is one of the ironies of history that the SS (who took the homes and possessions of the Jews by force) wanted to return all Jews to their homeland and it was therefore British who blocked this from happening (to protect their territorial interests). To this day the British still deny this truth. (See "The Order of the Death's Head" by German historian Heinz Hohne). Gandhi's story had now become a westernized cultural hagiography. Western Buddhists (hand in hand with Satyagraha proponents) have been a large part of this effort to portray him as a "saint". For my part I take sides with the Jewish fighters in the Warsaw ghetto, who were respected even by the SS. On the other hand, if Gandhi's soul is back on Earth doing the same type of thing again then the Jihadists will slaughter him this time instead of an Indian nationalist. After all, Dar-as-salam (the realm of Islam) has no earthly boundaries. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 8/29/07 6:37:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? Should have? Isn't that what they did?Thus the saying *never again*. - Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com. - Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
In a message dated 8/29/07 6:37:05 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? Should have? Isn't that what they did?Thus the saying *never again*. ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
suziezuzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? Empty Bill helps out boys and girls! What Did Gandhi Do? One-sided pacifist. By David Lewis Schaefer In the weeks leading up to Operation Iraqi Freedom, American college campuses were plastered with posters asking What Would Gandhi Do? The implication, of course, was that the U.S. should emulate the tactics of the celebrated Hindu pacifist who successfully led the movement for Indian independence from Britain. The analogy, it should go without saying, overlooks major differences between the two cases. Whereas the 20th-century British were far too benign an imperial power to choose to slaughter peaceful resisters to their rule, theres no evidence that Saddam Hussein, already responsible for the massacre and torture of hundreds of thousands of his countrymen (to say nothing of the many more who died in his aggressive wars against Iran and Kuwait) would likewise have succumbed to friendly persuasion Jacques Chirac to the contrary notwithstanding. (Its not that we didnt try!) It is interesting, in this regard, to recall how Gandhi himself responded to the evil perpetrated by one of Saddams role models, Adolf Hitler. In November, 1938, responding to Jewish pleas that he endorse the Zionist cause so as to persuade the British government to open Palestine to immigrants fleeing Hitlers persecution, Gandhi published an open letter flatly rejecting the request. While expressing the utmost sympathy with the Jews and lamenting their age-old persecution, Gandhi explained that the cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me, since Palestine belongs to the Arabs. Instead, he urged the Jews to make that country their home where they are born. To demand just treatment in the lands of their current residence while also demanding that Palestine be made their home, he argued, smacked of hypocrisy. Gandhi even went so far as to remark that this cry for the national home affords a colorable justification for the German expulsion of the Jews. Of course, Gandhi added, the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history, and if there ever could be a justifiable war in the name of and for humanity, a war against Germany, to prevent the wanton persecution of a whole race, would be completely justified. Hitlers regime was showing the world how efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. Nonetheless, the Hindu leader rejected that notion, since I do not believe in any war. And for Britain, France, and America to declare war on Hitlers regime would bring them no inner joy, no inner strength. Having rejected both the plea that Palestine should be offered as a place of refuge for the Jews and the idea that the Western democracies should launch a war to overthrow Hitler, Gandhi offered only one avenue for the Jews to resist their persecution while preserving their self-respect. Were he a German Jew, Gandhi pronounced, he would challenge the Germans to shoot or imprison him rather than submit to discriminating treatment. Such voluntary suffering, practiced by all the Jews of Germany, would bring them, he promised, immeasurable inner strength and joy. Indeed, if the Jewish mind could be prepared for such suffering, even a massacre of all German Jews could be turned into a day of thanksgiving and joy, since to the God-fearing, death has no terror. According to Gandhi, it would (for unexplained reasons) be easier for the Jews than for the Czechs (then facing German occupation) to follow his prescription. As inspiration, he offered an exact parallel in the campaign for Indian civil rights in South Africa that he had led decades earlier. Through their strength of suffering, he promised, the German Jews will score a lasting victory over the German Gentiles in the sense that they will have converted [them] to an appreciation of human dignity. And the same policy ought to be followed by Jews already in Palestine enduring Arab pogroms launched against them: if only they would discard the help of the British bayonet for their defense, and instead offer themselves [to the Arabs] to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea without raising a little finger, the Jews would win a favorable world opinion regarding their religious aspiration. In a thoughtful personal response dated February 24, 1939, the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber who had himself emigrated to Israel from Germany a short time earlier and combined his Zionism with earnest efforts to peacefully reconcile Jewish and Arab claims in the Holy Land chided Gandhi for offer
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'Remembering the Life of Mahatma Gandhi'
I heard that Gandhi in his philosophy of passifism once commented that the jew of Germany should have sat quietly in silent protest while Hilter exterminated them. Has anyone else heard anything about this? --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > GANDHI: THE MAHATMA -Dr. Ravindra Kumar* > It was in seventies I had an opportunity to discuss a little about Mahatma Gandhi with my teacher for the first time. What conversation I had about is now lost in the abyss of time. But later I always wondered why an international political leader like Gandhi was addressed as Mahatma, an honorific frequently used for a spiritually elevated soul. To find an answer, I think it is essential to review his life not in parts, but as a whole. > Gandhi affectionately called Bapu was a great leader endowed with a spiritual yearning for truth. The quintessence of his philosophy of life was the realization of Satya [truth] and Ahimsa [non- violence]. His purpose of life was as he says, "to achieve self- realization, to see God face to face, to obtain Moksha [Salvation]." But his approach was different from that of other seekers. > Gandhi received good Samskaras [pre-disposition] by virtue of his birth in a religious Vaishnava family of Gujarat, particularly from his mother who left an indelible impression of her saintliness on his tender mind. He imbibed truthfulness from the characteristics of the hero of the play `Harishchandra'. He wondered, "Why should not we be truthful like Harishchandra?" The question haunted him day and night. The king Harishchandra became the ideal hero of his dream and the paragon of truth. He so inspired him as to remain truthful all through his life even under trying circumstances and stands firm on his convictions. > Gandhi's endeavours for self-realization were through strict observance of truth. He moulded his actions on the basis of truth, only the truth that he perceived within. The word truth ordinarily connotes not to tell lies. But for Gandhi it implied much more. Even hiding the truth from someone was deemed as untruth by him. He considered that the narrow implication of the term had belied its magnitude. Defining Truth he writes, "The root of `Satya' [truth] lies in `Sat'. Sat means the `Being' and Satyathe feeling of the `Being'. Everything is perishable except `Sat'. Therefore, the true name of God is `Sat', thereby implying `Satya [Truth] so, instead of saying `God is Truth', it is better to say `Truth is God'. A question may now arise whether the realization of Truth and the realization of `Self' were one and the same for him or the two entities. We get the answer from Maharishi Raman, "What is Satya except `Self'? Satya is that which is made of Sat. Again Sat is nothing > but Self. So Gandhiji's Satya is only the Self." It is now clear, what Gandhi meant by Truth was in fact the realization of Self. He writes, " What I meant to achieve what I have been striving and pining to achieve these thirty years is self-realization, to see God face to face, to attain Moksha [salvation]." > How to realize God is a complicate question. The realization of God can be attained by purity of mind and heart and Sadhana [constant practice]. Bhagvad-Gita, the dialogue between Lord Krishna and Arjuna in the epic Mahabharata, is regarded as a sacred Hindu scripture and an infallible guide of daily practice. Lord Krishna tells about four paths of God-realization. They are the service and sacrifice [Karma Yoga], devotion and self- surrender [Bhakti Yoga], concentration and meditation [Raja Yoga], discrimination and wisdom [Jnana Yoga]. There is no line of demarcation between one and another and one path does not exclude the others. A seeker can follow any of them according to his/ her temperament. Ultimately they all lead to one goal the realization of God. > Gandhi held Bhagvad-Gita in high esteem. He writes, "Those who will meditate on Gita will derive fresh joy and new meanings from it everyday. There is no single spiritual tangle which the Gita cannot unravel." He found answer to the above question in GitaVairagya [non- attachment] or Abhyas Yoga [practice]. Vairagya means total indifference to worldly things and concentration only on the Absolute. Lord Krishna says in Gita: > "Fix thy mind on Me only, place thy intellect in Me; then thou shalt no doubt live in Me alone hereafter."[Chapter XII: Shloka 8] > And further says he, "If thou art not able to fix thy mind steadily on Me, then by Yoga of constant Practice [Abhyas Yoga] do thou seek to reach Me". [Ibid: 9] > Gandhi was born to serve humanity. He was a practical man; he chose the path of practice and the path of renunciation of the fruits of action. Absolute faith in God and surrender to His Will became his object of observance [Niyam] and the constant thought of the Truth Practice [Abhyas Yoga]. His mind was