Comparison between Gandhi and Buddha

I was interested to read the article reprinted in The Sunday Island on Mar. 31 titled ‘Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) the Greatest Indian Since the Buddha.’ I have read and heard this positive comparison between these two men before, but have long wondered if it is valid.

There were aspects of Gandhi’s life that were rather troubling – he was against modern dairies, trains (although he often traveled in them), vaccinations and most modern medicine, preferring instead cow-dung cures, he refused to educate his sons, discouraged his wife Kasturba from learning to read and write, etc.

Even his highly praised practice of ahimsa may not be as praiseworthy as is often claimed. When Gandhi couldn’t get what he wanted from the British he would go on a hunger strike. Is this really non-violence? Gandhi knew that if the British refused to give in to his demands and he died, all hell would break out, the whole country would explode – and the British knew it too, so they always gave in to him.

This is not non-violence; it’s using the threat of violence to blackmail an opponent. From a political perspective this and other strategies Gandhi used were clever and effective and made him a political and a national giant; but the Buddha was a moral and spiritual giant.

Shravasti Dhammika
Australia by email