Can Gandhiji be called aa a "MAHATMA"?

Yes gandhiji can be called a mahatma because what he preached and followed was non violence. He was not responsible for partition of India. It was Muhammad Jinnah who was responsible for that. Gandhiji was against partition.

Krupesh - ahimsa is something more than half the Indian women practice and have been practicing for several years now, with little results. I mean many of us are beaten up, we dont pick up sticks or beat back, we take it whether we've uttered a word or not. Does it really fetch? The society talks about it for a couple of days, when I walk out - people feel sorry. Beyond that - it is mind your own business. The object is to put the other party to shame - satyagraha - I interpret it as insisting on truth. Anyway coming to Gandhi - I read somewhere that he was rather harsh with his wife, because of which his children left him. There is more - he was brought in as a stooge - just like Hitler was brought in as a stooge. Those clothes and beliefs were collectively cultivated. You watch some of the old movies the idea is to create sympathy for the hero or heroine. The same psychology was being exploited through ahimsa. I found Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Bhagat Singh, Chandrasekhar Azad, and many others far more honest (satya). According to me, England could not continue with this colony because there were enough educated people to tell other people in the world what was happening back home. Moreover, during the World War II that had just concluded, there was this psychology against the German occupation - so all countries that tended to occupy became a big burden. Of course, Algeria continued under French occupation, but costs involved there were not as high as maintaining law and order out here. Returns were not as much. So there were other factors as well that must have resulted in this. Post World War II, there were financial problems, due to which Churchill lost the elections. Just like Obama stopped outsourcing, Atlee cut losses. So could it be a monetary move? Of course, we aggravated the problem by not buying their goods. That was smart move I must admit. The partition debacle only shows that Gandhi mismanaged. Come on, if a nation was entirely Gandhi's follower, and considered him Mahatma, how come they were not seeking his advise? He had served his purpose as an underfed stooge. Nobody really wanted him beyond that. Those were the perspectives given by somebody else, and I couldn't help reflecting on them. It is a possibility, isn't it? :)

krupesh how could Gandhij be killing anyone when He was the preacher of mon violence. I am an American not Indian but I have read about Ganhiji and he preached only non violence sure you had deaths in india but he was not the one guilty of that at all. Yes he was great he can be called Mahatma as he finally persuaded others to work with non violence. People from all over the world have admired Gandhiji immensely as have I.

Dear Krupesh, Today when we sit in our air-conditioned rooms in front of a laptop or a computer then it becomes ridiculously easy to post-mortem what our older generation did and didn't do and whether we should show respect to him or not ie. after 63 years of Independence. Remember, we are dong it out of luxury, Today. Most of the young generation in India are so absurd, selfish and materialistic that they can't probably tell the difference between Republic day and Independence day. I bet most won't even know the National Anthem or what does the National Emblem mean. So what I am trying to tell is Gandhiji was exceptional in the method he chose to fight against injustice and for our Independence. It was a remarkable feat what he did for us. So were all the freedom fighters who fought with valiant effort for the cause of our Independence. Be it Netaji, or Bal Tilak or Bhagat Singh or for that matter anybody who by their own capacity and means fought for "Us" to see that the generations to come could breathe in " free- Air". To compare one free fighter with another and to judge now who was greater than whom is obnoxious, and I dare say its stupidity. If one truly claims that he is in love with our country then lets do something for it, for the fallen pride like the CWG and numerous such examples, then possibly one shall earn the right to be a critic of our martyrs. Ummm... just occurred to me that great people never even criticize.

This is interesting, since we are all 'supposed' to think he was a great person. But I guess there are always different opinions. From what I know of him, I think it is safe to say that he can be called Mahatma. He did lead a movement of non violence and a lot of people followed that even though a lot others didn't. What are your views... I may be more ignorant about the details, would love to know.

You mean Mahatma is a title and not a name? What does it mean? What is the purpose of Ahimsa worship, like, what is he the god of? and what is a lakh? Maybe with more information that I do not have, I can answer better.

The great physicist says thus about Mahathma. "Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth. I think thse words sum up the resons for calling Gandhiji a Mahatma.