Struggle for Hindu Existence

*Hindu Rights to Survive with Dignity & Sovereignty *Join Hindu Freedom Movement to make Bharat Hindu Rashtra within 2025 *Jai Shri Ram *Jayatu Jayatu Hindu Rashtram *Editor: Upananda Brahmachari.

RSS should delete Gandhi from Ekatmata Stotram, as MoKa is now charge-sheeted with bisexuality, racism, sexual advances and alleged rape with Hindu virgins.

 Gandhi was bisexual, racist, claims new book

Mumbai | Agencies | 29-03-2011: Mahatma Gandhi, a renowned advocate of celibacy, truth and non-violence, was also a bisexual, a racist, and a man who loved the concept of humanity more than he loved individual human beings, claims a new book on the man, Great Soul: Mahatma Gandhi And His Struggle With India by Joseph Lelyveld, a Pulitzer prize-winning former New York Times executive editor.

In what is certain to raise the hackles of the Mahatma’s followers in India, the book claims that Gandhi had an affair with German-Jewish architect and bodybuilder Hermann Kallenbach, for whom he supposedly left his wife Kasturba in 1908.

Gandhi’s grandson, Gopalkrishna Gandhi told DNA, “There have been interpretations, re-interpretations and misinterpretations of Gandhi’s life and work — and Gandhi’s own writings have been the source of all three, as he has written so openly about his life. There have been hundreds of books written on Gandhi, and many more (including re-interpretations and misinterpretations) will continue to be written.” He added that he has not read Lelyveld’s book.

The book quotes from Gandhi’s letter to Kallenbach: “Your portrait (the only one) stands on my mantelpiece in my bedroom” and this mantelpiece “is opposite to the bed.” According to Lelyveld, cotton wool and Vaseline were “a constant reminder” of Kallenbach for Gandhi.

Lelyveld further states that Gandhi nicknamed himself ‘Upper House’ while Kallenbach was ‘Lower House’, and the Lower House was not supposed to “look lustfully upon any woman.”

According to Gandhi, active-celibacy meant perfect self control in the presence of opposite sex. Gandhi conducted his experiments with a number of women such as Abha, the sixteen-year-old wife of his grandnephew Kanu Gandhi. Gandhi acknowledged “that this experiment is very dangerous indeed”, but thought “that it was capable of yielding great results” (Tidrick, Kathryn (2007). Gandhi: A Political and Spiritual Life. I.B.Tauris. pp. 302-304). Many believe that, in the name of active celibacy, he not only used those women, but as he never sought for consent of them, he committed sexual oppression on them. On the other hand, the victims had no other alternative but to endure all such oppressions silently (Yashodhara Roychowdhuri, Ananda Bazar Patrika, 25.6.2006).

“How completely you have taken possession of my body,” the advocate of celibacy wrote to Kallenbach. And the two swore “more love…such love as they hope the world has not yet seen.”

 MOKA EXPOSED

Gandhi and Kallenbach got separated when the former came back to India in 1914, since the German could not travel to India in wartime. But according to the book, Gandhi never gave up hope, writing to him in 1933, “You are always before my mind’s eye.”

The book, which dwells at length on his work in South Africa, also claims that the Mahatma was racist towards the blacks. “We were then marched off to a prison intended for Kaffirs,” complained Gandhi during a campaign for the rights of Indians in South Africa. “We could understand not being classed with whites, but to be placed on the same level as the Natives seemed too much to put up with.”

Lelyveld quotes from a letter Gandhi wrote to the legislature of Natal province, where he speaks of how “the Indian is being dragged down to the position of the raw Kaffir,” who Gandhi believed to be someone, “whose sole ambition is to collect a number of cattle to buy a wife. “Of white Afrikaaners and Indians, he wrote: “We believe as much in the purity of races as we think they do.” Read DNA&MSN | The Telegraph | Indian Express.

Neither Manu nor Sushila had ever disclosed what happened on that fateful night. But it was not so difficult to guess. Most probably, Gandhi made sexual advances to Sushila and tried to rape an unwilling Sushila. She, on the other hand, prevented Gandhi and cried for help and that made Gandhi to scream out of frustration. After this incident, Nirmal Kumar decided to abandon Gandhi and he permanently left him on 18th March, 1947 (Ghose, Sankar (1991). Mahatma Gandhi, Allied Publishers. pp. 356, D Keer, p-759 & Yashodhara Roychowdhuri, ibid.).

GANDHI’S EXPERIMENT WITH CELIBACY

by Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari 

It is well known that Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the most trusted and the most loyal stooge of the British crown, served the British interest through his Satyagraha or the nonviolent freedom struggle. But most of the people of this country, who take him to be a man of high moral, do not know what short vile lechery he indulged in in the name of keeping Brahmacharys or celibacy, or in experimenting with the same. In 1903, when he was only 34 years old ( alternatively in 1906, when he was 37), or in other words, when he was at the zenith of his youth, he took a vow that he will observe celibacy and will remain a brahmachari for the rest of his life (D Keer, Mahatma Gandhi, pp-73)..

But the question remains, what made Gandhi, an extremely sensual man, to take such a vow? Gandhi was so sensual that when his father Karamchand was dying, he preferred to make love and have sex with his wife Kasturba in another room of the same house. So, when such a sensual Gandhi took vow to keep celibacy, one becomes suspicious that there must have been an evil intention behind that vow. Many believe that at that time, he developed some form of aversion towards Kasturba, an illiterate mother of three children, or in other words, he disliked to share bed with her. So, his intention was to abandon Kasturba as a sleeping partner in the name of keeping celibacy.

In 1882, when Mohandas was married to Kasturba, he was 13 and Kasturba was 14. While he was in South Africa, he came in contact with several educated and well bred women through his profession and Gandhi liked their company very much. From their company, Gandhi used to obtain a special kind of intellectual pleasure, which was not possible from Kasturba. At that time, more than a dozen women came very close to him and six of them were of Western origin. They were Graham Polak, Nilla Cram Cook, Madelline Slade (aka Miraben), Margarate Spiegel, Sonja Schlesin and Esther Faering (M V Kamath, Mahatma and Celibacy, Organiser, 2.7.2006). His closest Indian women were Srimati Prabhavati Devi (wife of Jaiprakash Narain), Kanchan Shah, Prema Ben Kantak, Sushila Nair (sister of Pyarelal), Manu Gandhi (wife of his grand-nephew Joysukhlal Gandhi), Ava Gandhi and Saraladevi Chaudhurani. This Saraladevi was a niece of the poet Rabindranath Tagore and her mother was Srimati Swarnakumari Devi (M V Kamath, ibid).

To narrate the affair between Gandhi and Saraladevi, Sri Girija Kumar says, “Saraladevi Caowdhurani came very close to Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi. Their whirl wind romance lasted for barely two years, but it upset the balance of the Gandhian establishment and shook its very roots. She is now a part of history and a footnote in contemporary Gandhian literature. She, however, left a scar in the minds of Gandhiji for the rest of his life.” (Brahmacharya: Gandhi and his Women Associates, as quoted by M V Kamath, ibid.). Gandhi used to admit that his relation with Saraladevi went up to sexuality (Girija Kumar (1997), The Book on Trial: Fundamentalism and Censorship in India, Har-Anand Publishers. pp. 73-107).

Read full article here ….. Gandhi’s Celibacy.

Now, Rashtriya Swamsevak Sangha should delete the name of Gandhi from Ekatmata Stotra, as MoKa ( Mohandas Karamchand) is clearly charge-sheeted with bisexuality, racism (finally pro Muslim), phedophile activities, sexual advances and alleged rape with Hindu virgins. Many research articles and the truth have proved that this Ghandhi successfully be-fooled the Indian mass to his inclination to be a “king-maker” in India  as a “uncrowned kingly saint”  and at the cost of the partition of India with a definite connivance with Muhammad Ali Jinnha ( QuaideAzam M A Jinnah). As opined by Dr Anwar Shaikh, a great thinker and Islamic scholar Gandhi and Jinnah had the same blood relation in their body.  Interested readers may kindly read Anwar Shaikah’s book “The tale of Two Gujrati Saints” ( read it as The tale of Two Gujrati Satans).

After all these, the name of the Sinner MOKA GANDHI should not be uttered anyway by the patriotic Swayamsevaks (cadres) of RSS in Sakha ( one hour daily programme) or individually. Any patriotic Indian or Hindu must recline the hymn no. 26 in the RSS morning hymn (Ekatmata Stotra, sloka 26), as it contains the filthy name of Gandhi……

May Gandhi had any relation with RSS. But there is no way left now to call this con man as DURATMA instead of MAHATMA.

RSS should resolute immediately.

~ Upananda Brahmachari.

Reading materials : The Tale of Two Gujrati Saints (Part I) by Anwar Shaikh

The Tale of Two Gujrati Saints (Part II) by Anwar Shaikh

Courtesy : DNA | MSN | Indian Express | The Telegraph | Dr R Brahmachari | Islam Review

12 comments on “RSS should delete Gandhi from Ekatmata Stotram, as MoKa is now charge-sheeted with bisexuality, racism, sexual advances and alleged rape with Hindu virgins.

  1. BK Verma
    March 31, 2011

    Dear Sir,
    I would be grateful if you please let me have addresses of the publishers of the two volume book on Gujararti Saints(?)
    Thanks and regards,
    BK Verma

    Like

    • Hindu Existence
      April 1, 2011

      Respected BK Vermaji,
      You can have this book(complete in one vol. paperback) from Mr. A Ghosh (Publisher), P.O.BOX 428, Kolkata – 700 064 with this ref. of Upananda Brahmachari of Hindu Existence. Please communicate first before sending any amount. For many important books like this, you ask them for current book lists. In case of address problem, please write here again.

      Some important books of Late Anwar Shaikh, a great scholar of Indian Philosophy and Islamic Religion.

      1. ETERNITY (Man is God and God is Man.Yet he is afraid. Why? An analysis of the semitic Religions: Judaism,Christianity & Islam) US $ 22.5

      2. FAITH AND DECEPTION (An analysis of dictators, prophets, renunciation of free will and complete submission to blind faith. as opposed to reasons and morality) US $ 24.5

      3. ISLAM – THE ARAB NATIONAL MOVEMENT (Islam is not a faith but a political national movement that the Prophet Muhammad had launched to establish Arab cultural imperialism over the non-Arab Mohammedans of the world) Rs. 50.00

      4. This is Jehad Rs. 50.00 5. Islam : Sex & Violence Rs. 100.00 and many more. ( Check the present price list).

      Like

  2. yogesh kumar saxena
    March 31, 2011

    Gandhi brought Independence to India is dangerously wrong. Gandhi only brought Partition for Hindus and Pakistan for Muslims. The British left India for their own compulsions, not because of Gandhi or the Congress. Its glaring proof is that they had suo moto declared in February 1947 that they would leave India by June 1948. Mountbatten was sent to India in March that year to ensure implementation of this decision. He saw the things, prepared the Partition plan, pursuaded or forced the Congress and the Muslim League to accept it. He preponed the British departure and unilaterally fixed 15th August 1947 as the date of transfer of power. Agreeing to Jinnah’s proposition, “First divide and then quit”, Mountbatten created Pakistan on the 14th August, 19947. That is why Pakistan celebrates its Independence Day a day earlier than ours. Gandhi had nothing to do with all these events. Mountbatten met him only once in April 1947 and did’nt talk to him any more till the Partition was completed, in spite of Gandhi’s opposition.

    By retaining the larger part of the Muslim population in India, instead of letting them go to their cherised homeland Pakistan, for which they had voted overwhelmingly, Gandhi and Nehru retained the seeds of another partition or Islamisation of Hindu India also. Such of the Hindus who believe that they are free or Independent are living in a fool’s paradise. They do not know the meaning of Independence. We daily see a dog cosily sitting in a car, being patted or kissed by a beautiful lady, eating sumptuous food. Will any of you wish to be a dog like that? certainly not. Economically, Hindus were equally rich during the Mughal period. There were no banks. Hindu Mahajans of the time did all the banking. Even the Muslim kings and nawabs took loan from them. Then, why were they crying? What did ail them? Why do we say and our forefathers said that Hindus suffered slavery for one thousand years? The answer is that the sovereignty of the State lay in Mohammedan rulers. They governed us according to Shariat laws. The political and social position of Hindus vis-a-vis Hindu converts to Islam was of second class citizens.As compared to Muslims of foreign origin, like the Mughals, the Arabs, the Iranians, etc., their position was third. They had to pay jazia. Their object of worship, cow, was butchered before their eyes. It was this inferior political and social position and religious persecution which caused revolt and Shivaji fought for Hindavi Swaraj. Guru Gobind Singh in Punjab, Chhatral in Bundelkhand and several others did the same.
    So the test of Freedom of a community or nation is, “Where does the sovereignty lies? Surely, it does not lie with the Hindus, as it lies with the Muslims in Pakistan or the British in the U.K. The answer is in the Constitution. The Indian Constitution gives over-riding powers to the minority communities, which practically means the Muslims. So they have the veto power. They have chosen to be governed by their Shariat laws, (except in criminal matters). In an affidavit to the Supreme Court, the Union government has approved their Shariat courts. The result is that you could not have a uniform civil code; could not get rid of the temporary provision of Article 370 in relation to J & K; could not get cow-slaughter banned; could not make Hindi the official language of the Indian Union as contemplated by the Constitution framers. The list can be endless.

    Hence, Hindus are yet to fight for a real freedom. If they don’t understand this obvious truth, they are bound to suffer another 1,000 years of slavery under Talibani Muslims.

    Like

  3. Pramod Kushwaha
    March 31, 2011

    Congress is Gandhi’s legacy. The Congress speaks amply about Gandhi’s character.

    Like

  4. Sudershan Shukla
    March 31, 2011

    It looks like many of RSS and BJPs icons will need to be be demolished before they come to their senses and stop ditching the Hindu cause, on which they rest their mass base on the sly.

    Like

  5. V. S. Sardesai
    April 6, 2011

    One thing is clear that Mahatma Gandhi was a sexy or an erotic person; as such it is difficult to understand why he took the vow of celebacy in 1903.But having taken the vow his further behaviour especially his experiment of active-celebacy appears to be psycological reaction to his extreme desire to sleep with women. A story is told about two monks. Once two monks were travelling together on the way there was a rivulet which was in spate and a beautiful woman was waiting fot crossing the river. When the monks saw it one of the monks helped her by taking her on the shoulder. In the evening when the monks were resting the other monk could not resist sayng to the first monk that what he has done in helping the woman was not proper. The first monk replier: “Brother it appears that the woman has not left you up till now for she is still in your mind. I have left her as soon as I left her on the other bank”. The same appears to be the case with Gandhi. Even though he took the vow of celebacy he could not forget women and his extreme desire to be with naket women resulted in making active-celebacy experiment even though it is in fact immoral and unethical.
    No Hindu scriptures provide for such an experiment. Moreover asking or sleeping with some other’s wife on the same bed naket is immoral. If at all he wanted to make experiment to test his capacity to withstand the temptation, he should have experimented with a prostitute rather than sleeping with some other’s wife or daughter. Moreover it appears that he failed in his experiment from the incident with Dr. Sushila Nair. Apart from that did he think that woman’s are guinea -pigs for making such experiment? What about their emotions and desires? Was he also testing their capacity to withstand and control their sexual desires?

    V. S. Sardesai

    Like

  6. Suresh Kumar Binjola
    April 18, 2011

    Dear friends,
    It is Difficult,Painfull-to hear this from far other country.
    What is Truth >>>>>>> ? It my Right ! Indian Government or congress have no Right ! you –can´t ingnore every News,Topic comming from any sourse–does not matter about whom,you must learn to Bring the truth to the Public.
    what ever I knew about Gandhi–ji? Offcourse evrything through the Books,Artical,News etc—I know He Was Man who studied Low—who lived In South Afrika,England ! offcourse he was Intellegent or let say Cleaver.>>>> i Like to know Does He Play a Big Political Game With US <<?My conciousness dont give me possitive signal ! may be very poor freequancy .

    Like

  7. premananda debnath
    May 9, 2011

    We dont have authority to suggest RSS because they know better than us what to do or not. So it is totally wrong to raise our voice againt RSS, because we are also part of Sangha Parivar. If we fight each other what to do or not, then it would be nothing but waste of time.

    Like

  8. yogeshsaxena
    May 9, 2011

    Gandhi brought Independence to India is dangerously wrong. Gandhi only brought Partition for Hindus and Pakistan for Muslims. The British left India for their own compulsions, not because of Gandhi or the Congress. Its glaring proof is that they had suo moto declared in February 1947 that they would leave India by June 1948. Mountbatten was sent to India in March that year to ensure implementation of this decision. He saw the things, prepared the Partition plan, pursuaded or forced the Congress and the Muslim League to accept it. He preponed the British departure and unilaterally fixed 15th August 1947 as the date of transfer of power. Agreeing to Jinnah’s proposition, “First divide and then quit”, Mountbatten created Pakistan on the 14th August, 19947. That is why Pakistan celebrates its Independence Day a day earlier than ours. Gandhi had nothing to do with all these events. Mountbatten met him only once in April 1947 and did’nt talk to him any more till the Partition was completed, in spite of Gandhi’s opposition.
    By retaining the larger part of the Muslim population in India, instead of letting them go to their cherised homeland Pakistan, for which they had voted overwhelmingly, Gandhi and Nehru retained the seeds of another partition or Islamisation of Hindu India also. Such of the Hindus who believe that they are free or Independent are living in a fool’s paradise. They do not know the meaning of Independence. We daily see a dog cosily sitting in a car, being patted or kissed by a beautiful lady, eating sumptuous food. Will any of you wish to be a dog like that? certainly not. Economically, Hindus were equally rich during the Mughal period. There were no banks. Hindu Mahajans of the time did all the banking. Even the Muslim kings and nawabs took loan from them. Then, why were they crying? What did ail them? Why do we say and our forefathers said that Hindus suffered slavery for one thousand years? The answer is that the sovereignty of the State lay in Mohammedan rulers. They governed us according to Shariat laws. The political and social position of Hindus vis-a-vis Hindu converts to Islam was of second class citizens.As compared to Muslims of foreign origin, like the Mughals, the Arabs, the Iranians, etc., their position was third. They had to pay jazia. Their object of worship, cow, was butchered before their eyes. It was this inferior political and social position and religious persecution which caused revolt and Shivaji fought for Hindavi Swaraj. Guru Gobind Singh in Punjab, Chhatral in Bundelkhand and several others did the same.
    So the test of Freedom of a community or nation is, “Where does the sovereignty lies? Surely, it does not lie with the Hindus, as it lies with the Muslims in Pakistan or the British in the U.K. The answer is in the Constitution. The Indian Constitution gives over-riding powers to the minority communities, which practically means the Muslims. So they have the veto power. They have chosen to be governed by their Shariat laws, (except in criminal matters). In an affidavit to the Supreme Court, the Union government has approved their Shariat courts. The result is that you could not have a uniform civil code; could not get rid of the temporary provision of Article 370 in relation to J & K; could not get cow-slaughter banned; could not make Hindi the official language of the Indian Union as contemplated by the Constitution framers. The list can be endless.

    Hence, Hindus are yet to fight for a real freedom. If they don’t understand this obvious truth, they are bound to suffer another 1,000 years of slavery under Talibani Muslims.

    Like

  9. Pingback: Gandhi was bisexual, racist, claims new book « tRuTH Of LigHt

  10. naik
    August 6, 2013

    Atal Bihari Vajpai has added Gandhi in the Ekatma Strot. Do you dare to challenge the wisdom of Atalji???
    It was bigheartedness and clear understanding of Atalji, that he boldly accepted, “we committed error in judging Mahatma Gandhi in past, we should include him in the prayer, He must be revered.”

    Dont hold your opinion on the basis of piles of Lies. Know Gandhi first from the genuine sources.
    Even Bhagat Singh keeps Gandhi in the frame of Greatman and the non-violence as the real method, in his book “why i am atheist?”
    Even Subhash Chandra Bose named one brigade in the Azad hind Fauz as Gandhi brigade, called Him Rashtrapita and accepted own mistakes in his autobiography.
    List is endless. Dare to enlighten yourself.

    Like

  11. Sri Venkateswarlu Vabilisetty
    September 30, 2015

    Jaisriram. It is too astonishing that Muslims who mostly benefited by Gandhi never respected him but Hindus who were mostly damaged by him are praising him as Mahatma. It is clear with this those Hindus who used to praise him always are FOOLS.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

HinduExistence Editor in Facebook

Upananda at Twitter

%d bloggers like this: