Sunteți pe pagina 1din 229

WAS GANDHI A

TANTRIC?

Nicholas F. Gier, Professor
Emeritus, University of
Idaho (ngier@uidaho.edu)

First presented at the annual
meeting of the Society for
Asian and Comparative
Philosophy,
Asilomar Conference Center,
Monterey, California, June,
2006

Second presentation at Rice
University, Department of
Religious Studies, November,
2006

Forthcoming in Gandhi Marg
28 (2007), but without
Sections IV & V

For a 900-word version click
here. A 5,000 word version is
here.

My meaning of
brahmacharya is this:
"One who never has
any lustful intention,
who . . . has become
capable of lying naked
with naked women . . .
without being in any
manner whatsoever
sexually excited."

--M. K. Gandhi[1]


The greater the
temptation, the greater the
renunciation.
--M. K. Gandhi[2]


I threw you in the sacrificial
fire and you emerged safe
and sound.

--Gandhi to his grandniece

Manu Gandhi[3]


I can hurt colleagues and the
entire world for the sake of
truth.

--M. K. Gandhi (letter to

Sushila Nayar)[4]



[Gandhi] can think only in
extremeseither extreme
eroticism or asceticism.

--Jawaharlal Nehru[5]


The professional Don
Juan destroys his spirit as
fatally as does the
professional ascetic,
whose [mirror] image he
is.

--Aldous Huxley[6]


Some scholars believe that it

is unseemly to write about the

sex lives of great thinkers.

William Bartley, for example,

has been criticized for

documenting, quite successfully

in my opinion, Ludwig
Wittgenstein's homosexual

encounters,[7] information that

helps us better understand his

life and work. If we use this

information in an ad hominem

attack against these thinkers'

worldviews, then we have


indeed erred and done them an

injustice. Full and accurate

biographies, however, are

essential for those of us who

wish to capture the full measure

of a person's life and character.

It is therefore unfortunate that


D. K. Bose, Gandhi's faithful

secretary and interpreter in

Bengal, was forced to self

publish his book My Days with

Gandhi. He only thought that he

was being truthful, but many

considered him an apostate, and


Sushila Nayar, one of Gandhi's

female initmates, thought he

had "a dirty mind."[8]

Jeffrey Kripal, author of

Kali's Child,[9] has also been

condemned for taking Sri


Ramakrishna's failed Tantric
initiation seriously and for
interpreting his interactions
with his male disciples as
homoerotic encounters. Most
people would rather not hear
about Martin Luther King's
extramarital liaisons, but they
extramarital liaisons, but they
remain embarrassing facts,
along with the plagiarized
passages in his doctoral
dissertation, that must be
integrated into our
understanding of this great saint
of nonviolence. King confessed
that what he did was wrong and
he sought forgiveness from his
wife and sought repentance.
Sadly, I do not think that we can
say that same thing about
Gandhi's response to those who
criticized his intimate relations
with young women.
Furthermore, King did not
defend his actions by saying
that they were part of his
spiritual development,
something that Gandhi of course
did.
It is now widely known that

Gandhi shared his bed with

young women as part of his

experiments in brahmacharya, a

Sanskrit word usually translated

as "celibacy," but generally

understood as the ultimate state

of yogic self-control. Gandhi


believed that Indian ascetics

who sought refuge in forests

and mountains were cowards,

and he was convinced that the

only way to conquer desire was

to face the temptation head-on

with a naked female in his bed. I

take Gandhi at his word that he


did not have carnal relations

with these womenhis sleeping

quarters were open to all to

observeso he was not among

the left-handed Tantrics who

engaged in ritual sex with their

yoginis. At the same time,

Gandhi's Tantricism cannot be


right-handed kind because this

school proscribes intimate

contact with women.

As would be expected, we

will find that Gandhi was a very

distinctive Tantric. Just as he

claimed that he was an Advaitin


while that the same time being a

Dvaitin,[10] perhaps it can be

said that Gandhi was somehow

simultaneously a left-handed

and right-handed Tantric.

Raihana Tyabji, a close associate

with a Tantric past, thought that


Gandhi's position straddling

right-handed and left-hand

Tantra was untenable, and that

the only way to free himself and

his women from sexual desire

was "to give free rein to itto

indulge it and satiate it. But he


wouldn't listen."[11] It is

significant to note that when his


colleagues criticized him for
sleeping with his grandniece
Manu, Gandhi defended himself
by saying that he, according to
Geoffrey Ashe, "held radical
views of brahmacharya and
urged them to study the Tantra
cult. (11a)

It is not widely known that

Gandhi subscribed to Shakta

theology, one that puts skakti,


the power of the Hindu Goddess,

at the center of existence. As we

shall see, Shakta theology is the

foundation of Hindu

Tantricism. Scholars have

warned us that not all Shaktas

are Tantrics, but Gandhis

sexual experiments with young


women definitely suggest some

association with Tantra. In the

first section I will evaluate the

position of one commentator

who makes strong claims about

Gandhi's Tantricism. In the

second section I explain

Gandhi's views on shakti and


how they relate to Tantricism.

The third section will

investigate how well Gandhi's

Tantric qualities match with a

standard list of what constitutes

Tantricism. The fourth section

is a summary of Gandhi's

intimate relations with early


female associates before he

invited women to share his bed.

The fifth section deals with

those women who were directly

involved his sexual experiments

and the effect that these

experiences had on them and on

Gandhi himself.
The final section will

compare Gandhi with

Ramakrishna's failed Tantric

initiation and Sri Aurobindos

relationship with Mira Richards,

better known simply as The

Mother. I will then summarize

what I believe we can


reasonably say about Gandhi's

Tantricism, and whether or not

he achieved the spiritual goal

that he was seeking. It is also

possible that that Gandhis

sexual experiments may have

been an abuse of personal


power rather than a practice of

Hindu spirituality.

One defense that could be


made for Gandhi's actions is
that he experienced intimate
relations with men as well.
Hermann Kallenbach, a South
Africa associate, was very close
to the Mahatma. Kallenbach
promised that he would travel
to the "ends of the earth in
search of [Gandhian] Truth,"[12]
and he also promised Gandhi
that he would never marry.
Gandhi reciprocated by
declaring unconditional love
and a declaration that they
would always be "one soul in
two bodies."[13]
Gandhi was also very close to
Pyarelal Nayar, Sushila Nayar's
brother, and boasted that
brother, and boasted that
Pyarelal slept closer to him than
his sister did. For Gandhi,
however, sleeping with men
was different from sharing a
bed with women. Abha Gandhi's
husband Kanu once objected to
his wife sleeping with the
Mahatma and offered himself as
a "bed warmer." Gandhi
rejected his proposal by making
it clear that brahmacharya
experiments required young
women as bedmates.[14]
Finally, if someone makes an
appeal to the Indian custom and
necessity of intimate Indian
family sleeping arrangements,
Girja Kumar is not convinced:
"Not even in India do grown-up
daughters sleep with their
fathers."[15]

I
In his book The Days with

Gandhi Bose does mention in

passing that Gandhis

techniques are "reminiscent of

the Tantras,"[16] and Gandhi

himself said that he read the

books on Tantra written by Sir


John Woodroofe,[17] but, as far

as I know, only Gopi Krishna

has argued at any length about

Gandhis Tantricism. In his on-

line essay "Mahatma Gandhi

and the Kundalini Process,"[18]

Krishna argues that the only


way that we can explain

Gandhis actions with these

young women is to assume he

was a kundalini yogi. Krishna

speculates that "upward flow of

reproductive energy [shakti]"

started as soon as he committed


himself to brahmacharya in

1906. Gandhi was 37, "the usual

time," from Krishnas own

experience, "for the


spontaneous arousal of the
Serpent Power."

As evidence that Gandhi had

perfected this state, Krishna

cites this passage from Gandhis


Key to Health: "[the

brahmacharis] sexual organs

will begin to look different. . . .

He does not become impotent

for lack of the necessary

secretions of sexual glands. But

these secretions in his case are


sublimated into a vital force

pervading his whole being."[19]

Krishna claims that this passage


makes it "patently clear" that
Gandhi had attained the state of
brahmacharya, but it is not clear
that Gandhi is writing about
himself, and that, except during
the crisis with Manu, he rarely
ever claimed spiritual
perfection.

As the kundalini yogi

matures, Krishna states that he


"needs constant stimulation to

increase the supply of

reproductive juices. . . . The

Tantras and other works on

kundalini clearly acknowledge

the need of an attractive female

partner in the practices


undertaken to awaken shakti."

Gandhi does in fact say that "my

brahmacharya . . . irresistibly

drew me to woman as the

mother of man. She became too

sacred for sexual love."[20]

Krishna admits that Gandhi


himself most likely "had no

inkling of the transformative

process at work in him," even

though he claims that Gandhi

noticed that his male organ had

shrunk. Krishna brushes aside

criticism of Gandhis actions and


also concern for the young

womens mental health, because

"nature accomplishes her great

tasks in her own way and leaves

short-sighted mortals

wondering how it could

happen." Apart from the


speculative nature of Krishnas

theory, we should be most


concerned about his disregard
for the womens well being, as
well has the implication that
Gandhi was driven by forces
over which he had no control.

II

For Gandhi the virtues of

patience, self-control, and

courage were absolutely


essential to defeat the

temptation to retaliate and

respond with violence. Gandhi

made it clear that each of these

virtues were found most often

in women. Gandhi once said

that he wanted to convert the

womans capacity for "self-


sacrifice and suffering into

shakti-power."[21] Gandhi

describes womankind as

follows: "Has she not great

intuition, is she not more self-

sacrificing, has she not greater

powers of endurance, has she


not greater courage?"[22] He

also claimed that ahimsa is

embodied in the woman: she is

"weak in striking. . . strong in

suffering."[23]

The women around Gandhi

were amazed how comfortable


they felt in his presence and

how much of a woman he had

become to them. Millie Polak

observed that "most women

love men for [masculine]

attributes. Yet, Mohandas

Gandhi has been given the love


of many women for his

womanliness."[24] His orphaned

grandniece Manu considered

Gandhi as her new mother, and

she simply could not

understand all the controversy

surrounding their sleeping


together. D. K. Kalelkar also

thought that there was no

scandal with Manu, "because his

relationships with women were,

beginning to end, as pure as

mother's milk."[25]
The fact that women felt no

unease in his presence was

proof to Gandhi that he was

approaching perfection as a

brahmachari. Indeed, Bose

contends that Gandhi attempted

to "conquer sex" was "by


becoming a woman."[26]

Gandhi told Pyarelal Nayar that

he once tore the burning sari off

a woman in his ashram, but

"she felt no embarrassment,

because she knew I was a

brahmachari and so almost like


a sister to her."[27] Gandhi also

mentions Krishna's bathing

gopis, their clothes hidden from

them, standing unembarrassed

in front of their beloved Lord.

[28] Alternatively, Gandhi says

that his goal was the state of


"complete sexlessness"

recommended by Jesus and that

this condition could be achieved

by becoming a eunuch by

prayer not by an operation.[29]

Shakti is substantially

different from the masculine


tejas, a power that the gods and

brahmins possess, because

shakti is a necessary attribute

that the Goddess shares with

everything in the universe.

Ontologically speaking, tejas is a

quality, seen most clearly in its


meaning as fire, a primary

element of the basic substance,

while shakti is that basic

substance. The Hindu Goddess

theology essentially breaks the

vicious cycle of the Vedic

maxim, explained superbly by


Brian K. Smith,[30] that one

gains power only at another's

expense. The Vedic power

game, as with most patriarchal

concepts of power, is a zero-sum

game; those who control the

sacrifice control tejas. The


result is constant battles

between gods and antigods,

gods and ascetics, priests and

kings. Goddess theology offers

something radically different:

shakti is a power that all beings


have by virtue of their very

existence.

Given Gandhi's commitment

to the nonviolent feminine, we

must read shakti rather than

tejas when he states that "all

power comes from the


preservation and sublimation of

the vitality that is responsible

for the creation of life."[31]

Gandhi may very well be

indicating a Tantric process of

empowerment that involves the

preservation and sublimation of


a male vitality that has its

source in shakti. When Gandhi

did his first radio broadcast on

November 12, 1947, he declared

that the phenomenon of

broadcasting demonstrated
"shakti, the miraculous power of

God."[32]

When Gandhi once described

himself as "half a woman,"[33]

an alternative view of

masculine and feminine power

suggests itself. The


Chinese/Jungian view of

complementary yin (anima) and

yang (animus) energies is found

in this passage: "A man should

remain man and yet should

learn to become woman;

similarly, a woman should


remain woman and yet learn to

become man."[34] (This view of

coequal powers differs

ontologically from the view of

shakti as primary and tejas as

derivative.) Hsi Lai uses the

yin/yang model to explain


Gandhis sexual experiments:

"He didnt do this for the

purpose of actual sexual

contact, but as an ancient

practice of rejuvenating his

male energy. . . . Taoists called


this method using the yin to

replenish the yang."[35]

The source of Gandhis


dipolar views of male and
female may have been Christian
rather than Asian. While a
young man in England, Gandhi
came into contact with the
Esoteric Christian Union, whose
interpretation of the image of
God meant that the individual
"must comprise within himself

the qualitiesBmasculine and

feminineBof existence and be


spiritually both man and

woman."[36] When he

confesses to Kedar Nathji and

Swami Anand that his sexual

experiments were

"unorthodox," Gandhi says that

his views on this subject had


been influenced by "Western

writers on this subject."[37] We

will see that Aurobindo had

similar views of a dipolar

relationship between himself

and his own skakti Mira

Richards. The emphasis that


both men placed on equality

with women fits this male-

female model much better.

Hindu Tantrics drew their

philosophical inspiration from a

fusion of Upanishadic monism

and Sankhya-Yoga with its


radical dualism of purusha

(pure spirit) and prakriti

(material energy). Tantricism

dissolves this dualism by

identifying prakriti as the

Goddess, who then creates both

the spiritual and material


worlds. Here is an illustrative

passage from the Devi-

Mahatmya, one of the first

Shakta texts: "You are the

primordial material (prakriti) of

everything, manifesting the

triad of constituent strands [of


gunas]; (You are) the cause of all

the worlds . . . the supreme,

original, untransformed

Prakriti."[38] A common image

for Shaivite Tantricism is Kali

standing on top of an inert

Shiva"Shiva without Shakti is


a corpse"[39]confirming in

Shakta theology that even the

gods derive their power from

Durga/Kali's shakti. A

Vaishnava version of this is

beautifully succinct: "Without

you [Radha], I [Krishna] am


inert and am always powerless.

You have all powers [shakti] as

your own form; come into my

presence."[40]

Despite this emphasis on

goddess dynamism, it is the

human male who is active in


Tantric rites. Only males

undergo initiation, and the only

instruction females receive, if

they get any, is that they "should

not even mentally touch

another male."[41] Gandhi's

Tantricism definitely follows


this androcentric approach.

Gandhi also takes the defiant

stance of the Tantric who says

that he cares nothing for what

others thinks of his practice:

"The whole world may forsake

me but I dare not leave what I


hold is the truth for me."[42]

Gandhi once admonished a

critic that he would sleep with a

thousand women if that is what

it took to reach spiritual purity.

[43]

Buddhist Tantricism,

interestingly enough, inverts the


active/passive polarity and

makes the Goddess passive and

the male active. (Exceptions to

this were some Tantric

Buddhists in Bengal and

Oddiyana who kept the dynamic

female, and the goddesses

Vajravarahi and Aparajita who


maintained active power in

Tibet.)[44] As prakriti the Hindu

Goddess was primordial cause,

but in the Hevajra Tantra the

"yogin is Means and Compassion

(upaya), and the yogin [is]

Wisdom (prajna) and Voidness


for she is deprived of

causation."[45] Ironically, an

active Hindu Goddess did not

lead to any relief for oppressed

women in India, but a passive

Buddhist Goddess has inspired

the practice of thousands of


female Tantrics in the Tibetan

tradition, including Mongolian

nuns I witnessed training in the

Red Hat sect in Ullanbatur.

Superficially, it appears that

Gandhi's dominance in his

sexual experiments may


indicate a completely passive

female role, but his statements

about shakti quoted above

support, at least philosophically,

the Hindu view of active female

power. Nevertheless, Gandhi

would have approved of the fact


that many of the Buddhist

Siddhas receive instruction

from mentor goddesses

(dakinis), and some of the

Siddhas are women themselves.

Furthermore, nonviolence,

salvation of the lower castes,


and selfless service to others are

pervasive themes in the stories

of the 84 Buddhist Siddhas.[46]

Bharati is correct in rejecting

the standard Advaitin strategy

of identifying their absolute

monism with Nagarjuna's


deconstruction of all

metaphysics,[47] or the

constructive postmodern view

that Nagarjuna's is subtlely

reformulating the non-

substantial ontology of Pali

Buddhism.[48] But I believe


Bharati is wrong to imply that

the Shakta philosophy behind

Hindu Tantricism dissolves the

phenomenal into the noumenal

into a state of "absolute

oneness."[49] I make this

criticism only from the


standpoint of the Shakta

tradition, which I have studied

carefully, and not the Tantric

sutras of which I currently

know little. In any case,

Gandhis neo-Vedanta does not

embrace this absolute monism.


III

Gandhi's embrace of Shakta

philosophy and his "sacred"

experiments with young women

(calling one of them his

"spiritual wife") qualify him as

some type of Tantric, but let us


see how his practice matches

the criteria traditionally used to

identify Tantrics. If Tantra is

"psycho-experimental

interpretation of non-Tantric

lore,"[50] then Gandhis

experiments with young women


as a means to become a

bramachari certainly qualifies

as Tantra. Gandhi is also a

Tantric in that he believes that

his investigations are value free

in that they place experiment


above conventional law and

morality.

One significant difference in

this regard is that while Indian

Tantricism represents a

premodern recovery of

primordial knowledge, Gandhi


most often models his

experiments in truth on a

modern scientific discovery of

new personal truths, saying in

particular that he "framed [his]

own rules [for brahmacharya]

as occasion necessitated."[51]
However, in his response to A.

V. Thakkar in February, 1947, he

leaves the scientific model: "It is

not an experiment but an

integral part of my yajna. One

may forgo an experiment, one

cannot forgo ones duty."[52] In


his response to Boses criticisms

of his sleeping with Manu,

Gandhi claims that "I have not

become modern at all in the

same sense you seem to mean. I

am as ancient as can be
imagined and hope to remain so

to the end of my life."[53]

Normally Tantric practices

are tightly structured, highly

ritualized, and the initiation

procedures, guided by a guru,

are esoteric. The only bona fide

guru in Gandhis spiritual


development was

Raichandcharya, a Jain saint,

not a Tantric, with whom

Gandhi corresponded during his

formative South Africa period.

Gandhi officiated at daily

worship and hymn singing,

encouraged the chanting of the


Ramanama, and followed an

unconventional diet, but these

practices are not Tantric in any

way. The chanting of the

Ramanama is said to have

magical properties, but its use is

so widespread in India it may

not indicate any special Tantric


associations. Nevertheless,

Gandhi does connect the

chanting of Rama's name with

"an alchemy [that] can

transform the body" that leads

to "the conservation of vital

energy."[54]
Gandhis experiments with

truth were highly personalized

but not spiritually esoteric as

are Tantric practices. Only after

the sexual experiments came

under public scrutiny did

Gandhi started telling his female


associates to keep their

activities secret. Not until his

last days, when his sleeping

with Manu became public, did

Gandhi confess that this secrecy

was actually a sign of

untruthfulness.[55] Gandhi's
secrecy was simply expedient

and not spiritually required.

Let us now check Douglas R.

Brooks ten "principal generic

features of Hindu Tantricism"

against Gandhis spiritual

practices. The first feature is


that the Tantric, while based in

the Vedic tradition, appeals to

extra-Vedic "practices, concepts,

and traditions." Gandhis

experiments with truth are

definitely extra-Vedic practices,

and he frequently appealed to


concepts and traditions that had

their origins outside of India. It

appears that Gandhi also meets

the second criterion that

Tantrics practice "special forms

of yoga and spiritual

discipline." Gandhi also


embraces Brooks third Tantric

principlenamely, "Tantrics are

at once theists and philosophical

nondualists."[56] Gandhi is

frustratingly inconsistent on

this matter, alternating between

a fervent personal theism and


equally strong affirmation of

impersonal monism. I believe

that Gandhi is best understood

as a neo-Vedantist, one, such as

Aurobindo and Vivekananda,

who saw Atman-Brahman as a

dialectical identity of the One


and the Many. The last section

is devoted to the Tantric aspects

of this movement.

Except for possibly two, the

rest of Brooks "generic

features"the use of mantras

(4th), yantras and mandalas


(5th), the absolute authority of

the guru (6th), god and goddess

conjugal union (7th), and the

use of unconventional

substances (9th) are not found

in Gandhis spiritual practices.

The ninth criterion is not


entirely alien to Gandhi

because, in addition to the four

forbidden substances, the 5th

makara is "sexual intercourse

outside the legitimate, dharmic

boundaries of marriage."[57] It

is significant to note that,


although we are assuming he

did not engage in sex, Gandhis

experiments were not with his

legal wife but with young virgin

girls, a requirement for left-

handed Tantrics. Brooks eighth

criterion actually has two parts,


the first requiring that Tantra

be esoteric, which does not

match Gandhi, but the second,

Tantric practice is "dangerous"

and "not easily controlled or

mastered," fits Gandhi quite

nicely. The tenth feature, that


the practice is open to all

regardless of gender or caste, is

also one that Gandhi easily

qualifies.

IV
Before Gandhi started his
brahmacharya experiments in
1938, he had a string of intimate
relationships with European
and Indian women. I am
indebted to Girja Kumar's book
Brahmacharya: Gandhi and His
Women Associates for
information about the five
information about the five
women discussed in this section.
In contrast to Bose, who
encountered resistance
everywhere when he tried to
publish on this topic 50 years
ago, Kumar's book, which is
more explicit, judgmental, and
comprehensive than Bose's, has
been warmly received, signaling
that most Indians are now ready
to accept Gandhi as fully
human. Kumar's sources are
not secret or anonymous; in
fact, most of the material comes
from letters found in Gandhi's
Collected Works.

While he was in South

Africa, Gandhi fell in love with


Millie Polak, the wife of Henry

Polak, both of whom lived with

Gandhi at Phoenix Farm.

Kumar describes their first

contact as follows: "Gandhiji

and Millie started conversing

through their eyes. They made


a pact between them

immediately. Poor Henry was

left stranded."[58] As with all of

his female friends, Gandhi

insisted that he and Millie be

sisters or alternatively that he

be her father, but after they


were together in London in 1909

without Henry, Gandhi dared to

suggest that he was a substitute

husband.[59]

Even though Millie was

smitten by him, she stood up to

Gandi's controlling nature and


argued against his absurd

dietary ideas and his goal to

force chastity on all his

coworkers. This independent

spirit that defines most of his

female intimates of this early

period stands in instructive


contrast to the passive

participants in the later

brahmacharya experiments.

For example, Kumar describes

Manu as a devotee who "was

prepared to sacrifice her life at

the altar of her ishtadeva


(personal God)."[60] Gandhi

controlled every aspect of

Manu's life, and when she once

forgot his favorite soap at their

last stay, he made her walk back

through a dark jungle to

retrieve it.
When Millie finally broke

off their 3-year affair, Gandhi's

attentions turned to Maud

Polak, Henry's sister. Maud

worked with Gandhi at Phoenix

Farm as his personal secretary

until 1913. In a letter to Henry,


Gandhi described Maud seeing

him off at a railway station:

"She cannot tear herself from

me. . . . She would not shake

hands with me. She wanted a

kiss. [This incident] has


transformed her and with her

me."[61]

Esther Faering, a young

Danish missionary, was the next

major love in Gandhi's life.

From her very first visit at the

Satyagraha Ashram in 1917,


Kumar describes Faering as

"completely hooked on" Gandhi,

and as with Millie Polak, "an

instant chemistry developed"

between them. Gandhi

"experienced an intensely

personal passion for Esther,"


and she praised him as the

"Incarnation of God in man."

[62]

The other ashramites were

alarmed at Gandhi's obsession

with Faering, and Kasturba

Gandhi was particularly cool to


her husband's new love

interest. Gandhi made matters

worse by siding with Faering

against his wife. While he was

away from the ashram, he

wrote daily letters to Faering,

which Kumar describes as


having the passionate intensity

of the bhakti and sufi poets. He

hazards a guess that "Esther

must have stirred," as young

beautiful women are supposed

to do in the Tantric yogi, "the


serpent resting uncoiled in

[Gandhi's] kundalini."[63]

One would expect Gandhi to


have at least been serially
monogamous in his
relationships, but that was not
the case. While Faering was
struggling against Kasturba and
other ashramites and receiving
Gandhi's loving support by mail,
he was away conducting what
Kumar calls a "whirlwind
romance" with Saraladevi
Chowdharani, a Bengali
revolutionary married to a
Punjabi musician. Her father
was a secretary of Indian
National Congress in Calcutta,
and by virtue of her singing and
activism, Saraladevi was
celebrated as Bengal's Joan of
Arc and as an incarnation of
Arc and as an incarnation of
Durga. She rose to the challenge
and wrote that "my pen
reverberated with the power of
Shiva's trumpet and invited
Bengalis to cultivate death."[64]
After the Jallianwala Bagh
massacre in 1919, Gandhi stayed
at Saraladevi's home in Lahore
and then they toured India
together during 1920. Her
husband, R. D. Chowdhary, was
in jail for the first eight months
this period, but he was content,
as was Henry Polak, to share his
wife with the Mahatma. Gandhi
agreed with Chowdhary that
Saraladevi was the "greatest
shakti of India."[65]
Gandhi called Saraladevi his
"spiritual wife" after "an
intellectual wedding," and he
reported that he bathed "in her
deep affection" as she showered
"her love on [him] in every
possible way."[66] Kasturba
Gandhi had refused to wear
possible way." Kasturba
Gandhi had refused to wear
khadi, but Saraladevi became
the Mahatma's most elegant
khadi model. Kumar describes
them as "lovelorn teenagers
with stars in their eyes," and
depicts Saraladevi as
"aristocratic, gorgeously
dressed, sensuously beautiful,
and imperious. In short, she
had everything that [Kasturba]
lacked."[67]

In contrast to his later

brahmacharya mistresses,

Saraladevi, just as Millie Polak

before her, did not bow to


Gandhi's authority in any way.

For example, as the quotation

above implies, she agreed with

fellow Bengalis, such as the

young Aurobindo, that

independence required violent

revolution. Following her

Goddess, Durga's shakti was


always accompanied by

violence, and Saraladevi

eventually broke with Gandhi

over this very issue.

Kumar concludes that just as

his relation to Faering, while

"full of sensuality," was asexual,

Gandhi's romance with


Saraladevi was "probably . . .

entirely platonic." There was,

however, a "large component of

eroticism" and the "line of

demarcation between sexual,

sensuous, erotic and platonic

was only of degree and not of


kind."[68] Kumar's phrasing is

unfortunate and logically

incoherent, because "degree"

means a slippery slope and not

a strict line between the

intellectual/spiritual and the

physical. In letters to Saraladevi


in July, 1920, Gandhi insists that

being "spiritually" married

means that the "physical must

be wholly absent," but he then

admits that he is "too physically

attached to" her for there to be a

true "sacred association."[69] In


his conversations with Margaret

Sanger, Gandhi refers to a

"woman with whom I almost

fell," and "the thought of my

wife kept me from going to

perdition." Writing to

Rajkumari Amrit Kaur, a later


bedmate, he admitted the he,

"with one solitary exception,"

had never "looked upon a

woman with lustful eyes."

These two references must have

been to Saraladevi

Chowdharani.
Madeleine Slade, later

Gandhi's beloved Mirabehn, was

the daughter of a British naval

officer who was once stationed

in Bombay. Mirabehn first

learned of Gandhi through

Romain Rolland, who was then

writing a Gandhi biography.


She wrote to Gandhi requesting

that she become a member of

the Sabarmati Ashram, but he

required that she live as an

ascetic for one year before

coming to India. More than any

of his disciples, Mirabehn

eagerly took to the austerities


that Gandhi demanded. As

opposed to Kasturba, who

disliked latrine duties,

Mirabehn eagerly took charge of

the toilets, even those for all the

delegates to a meeting of the

Indian National Congress.


At their first meeting in

November, 1925, Mirabehn

found Gandhi "divine," and she

was able to confirm Rolland's

claim that he was indeed the

second Christ. They fell in love

with one another and Kumar


says that "Mira was Saraladevi .

. . all over again." Once again,

because of Gandhi's fascination

for her, Mirabehn was shunned

by the ashramites. Gandhi soon

discovered that Mirabehn's

emotional instability caused his


blood pressure to rise, so he

frequently sent her away on

other tasks. They did, however,

keep in contact with weekly self-

described "love letters," and

Gandhi wrote that she haunted

his dreams.[70] Mirabehn


agreed with Gandhi's depiction

that their passion was like a

"bed of hot ashes,"[71] a

veritable ascetic-erotic rhapsody

of yogic tapas. Gandhi also

shared with Mirabehn agonies

about his spontaneous


erections, daytime ejaculations,

and wet dreams, for which he

castigated himself unmercifully,

and they even discussed the

causes and cures of

constipation.


V
Of the women closely
associated with Gandhi, at least
ten were said to have slept in
his bed. They can be identified
his bed. They can be identified
as follows:

Sushila Nayar was only 15


when she came to the
Sabarmati Ashram and
then became Gandhi's
intimate companion, with
some periods of
alienation and remove,
for the rest of his life.
Gandhi claimed that
Nayar was a natural
brahmachari, having
observed it from
childhood.[72] They
bathed together and even
used the same bath water,
but Gandhi assured
everyone that he kept his
"eyes tightly shut."[73]

Lilavati Asar, associated


Lilavati Asar, associated
with Gandhi from 1926-
1948, slept in his bed and
gave him "service," which
meant bathing and
massaging.

Sharada Parnerkar slept


"close" to Gandhi and
rendered "service." She
was very ill in October,
1940, and Gandhi gave
her regular enemas.

Amtul Salaam, whom


Gandhi called his "crazy
daughter," was a Punjabi
from Patiala. She was
also a bedmate and
masseuse. Gandhi once
wrote about the joy he
gave Salaam when she

received a massage from


received a massage from
him.[74]
Prabhavati Narayan, a
Kashmiri, lived in an
unconsummated
marriage with
Jayaprakash Narayan,
Indira Gandhi's most
famous political foe.
Because of her lack of
sexual interest or desire,
Gandhi thought that
Prabhavati would be a
perfect married
brahmachari. In addition
to sleeping with Gandhi,
she also gave him
"service."

Raj Kumari Amrit Kaur,


married to a Rajasthani
prince, was Indias first
health minister and was a
Gandhi associate for 30
years. Although older,
years. Although older,
she slept right along with
the younger women in
Gandhi's quarters. She
also helped with baths
and massages.

Sucheta Kriplani, a
member of Parliament
and professor at Benares
Hindu University, was a
member of Gandhis
Peace Brigade in East
Bengal in 1947. She
maintained a
brahmachari marriage
with J. B. Kriplani, a
famous socialist and saint.
Gandhi fought their union
tooth and nail. Although
Gandhi invited Mrs.
Kriplani to his bed on a
regular basis, he insisted
that married couples in

his ashrams always sleep


his ashrams always sleep
in different quarters.

Abha Gandhi was a


Bengali who accompanied
the Mahatma in East
Bengal. She started
sleeping with Gandhi
when she was 16; she also
bathed him and washed
his clothes.

Kanchan Shah, also a


married woman, had a
"one night stand" with
Gandhi and was banned
from brahmacharya
experiments because she
reputedly wanted to have
sex with him.[75] Gandhi
gave the following
instructions on
brahmachari marriage to
Shah and her husband:
Shah and her husband:
"You should not touch
each other. You shall not
talk to each other. You
shall not work together.
You should not take
service from each other."
[76] But Gandhi of course
received "service" from
his women on a daily
basis. On the hypocrisy of
taking what he denied to
others, Kumar has this to
say: "The vow of
brahmacharya was a
revenge he took upon
everyone else."[77]
Manu Gandhi was his
brothers granddaughter
and she was his constant
companion for the last
eight years of his life.
Interestingly enough,
there is a temple to Manu,
a powerful rain goddess,

in Gandhis home city of


in Gandhis home city of
Porbandar.

Most accounts of Gandhis


spiritual experiments focus on
those with Manu in 1946-47 in
East Bengal. Although he
conceded at the time that it
"may be a delusion and a snare,"
and although he seemed to be
recalling his earlier experiments
at Sevagram"I have risked
perdition before now"he was
still confident that he had
"launched on a sacrifice [that]
consists of the full practice of
truth" and the development of a
"non-violence of the brave."[78]
He said that these tests were no
longer an experiment, which
could be seen as optional, but a
compulsory sacred duty (yajna).
His hut where he slept with
Manu was called "holy ground,"

and Manu's father had to sleep


and Manu's father had to sleep
elsewhere when he visited.[79]

There is some confusion


about whether the women
simply slept next to him or
shared the same cover, or
whether they slept clothed or
unclothed. The scenario
appeared to be that they first
slept next to him, then slept
under the same cover without
clothes. Significantly, Gandhi
admitted that "all of them would
strip reluctantly. . . and they did
so at my prompting."[80] As to
the reason for complete
nakeness, Sushila Nayar recalls
Gandhi's explanation to Manu:
"We both may be killed by the
Muslims at any time. We must
both put our purity to the
ultimate test. . . and we should

now both start sleeping naked."


now both start sleeping naked."
[81]

Gandhi described his


sleeping with Manu as a "bold
and original experiment," one
that required a "practiced
brahmachari" such as he was,
and a woman such as Manu
who was free from passion.[82]
Confessing as she even might
have done with her own
mother, Manu told Gandhi that
she had not ever experienced
sexual desire. Presumably
because of these ideal
conditions, Gandhi predicted
that the "heat would be great."
[83] It is not clear whether
Gandhi was speaking of the yogi
heat of tapas, or the heat of the
negative reactions that he
anticipated.

One has to admire Manu


because it was she, not Gandhi,
who suggested that they not
sleep together any longer. It is
harder to credit Gandhi,
particularly when he said that
the experiments ceased because
of Manus "inexperience," not
because of any failing on his
part. As Kumar states: "Just five
days before Gandhiji was
assassinated, he charged her
with failing to realize the
potential of mahayajna."[84] So
it was Manu's fault, not his.

Controversy about the


practice continued during the
summer of 1947, but Gandhi
was pleased when two editors of
Harijan, who had resigned in
protest about the experiments,
confessed that they had
confessed that they had
misjudged Gandhi. It is not clear
that the experiments stopped
because Pyarelal notes that "the
practice was for the time being
discontinued"; indeed, after
returning to Delhi, Manu and
Gandhi resumed sleeping
together and "continued right
till the end."[85]

Gandhis "sacred
associations" actually began at
his Sevagram ashram as early as
1938, when his wife Kasturba
was still alive. Sushila Nayar
not only slept with him there,
but also gave him regular
massages, sometimes in front of
visitors, and they, as I have
noted, bathed together. About
his relations to Nayar, Gandhi
states: "She has experienced
everything I have in me. . . . She

is more absorbed in me. Hence I


is more absorbed in me. Hence I
would even make her sleep by
my side without fear."[86] Nayar
told Ved Mehta that "long before
Manu came into the picture, I
used to sleep with him just as I
would with my mother. . . . In
the early days there was no
question of calling this a
brahmacharya experiment. It
was just part of a nature cure.
Later on, when people started
asking questions about his
physical contact with women,
the idea of brahmacharya
experiments was developed."
[87] The fact that Gandhi
changed the justification for
these experiments after closer
public scrutiny suggests that his
motivation for these actions
may not have been as pure as he
wanted people to assume.

In an extremely candid
In an extremely candid
confession, Gandhi admits that
at Sevagram he had made a
grave mistake:

I feel my action was impelled


by vanity and jealousy. If my
experiment was dangerous, I
should not have undertaken
it. And if it was worth trying,
I should have encouraged my
co-workers to undertake it
on my conditions. My
experiment was a violation
of the establishment norms
of brahmacharya. Such a
right can be enjoyed only by
a saint like Shukadevji who
can remain pure in thought,
word and deed at all times of
day.[88]

Gandhi, however, could not


Gandhi, however, could not
maintain his resolve, because
shortly thereafter (as soon as 12
hours!) intimate contact with
women of the ashram resumed.
According to Mark Thomson,
"Gandhi explained that he could
not bear the pain and anguish
suffered by women devotees
denied the opportunity to serve
him in this fashion."[89] Gandhi
confessed that he "could not
bear the tears of Sushila and
fainting away of Prabhavati."
[90] In February, 1939, there
was another crisis. Gandhi
admitted that four women at
Sevagram did not like "giving
service" and they were ordered
to sleep "out of reach" of his
arms.[91]

When Gandhi spoke of the


dangers of his sexual
experiments in 1938, he must
experiments in 1938, he must
have realized that he was not
ready for the test. While he did
claim that he "can keep [sexual
desire] under control," he
admitted he had not "completely
eradicated the sex feeling,"[92] a
criterion that he had honored
from the traditional rules of
brahmacharya. Gandhi openly
admitted that there were some
"black nights," presumably
sleeping with his women, in
which God "saved me in spite of
myself."[93]

One of these dark nights


must have been May 9, 1938. In
a letter to Nayar's brother,
Gandhi admitted that he may
have had "a dirty mind" and
may have played "the role of
Satan." His "diseased mind"
might have "aroused him" and
thereby compromised Nayar,
thereby compromised Nayar,
causing her "untold misery."[94]
Gandhi was obviously wrong
when he claimed previously
that Nayar's natural purity
could "forestall any mistake I
may make," and that "contact
with her has brought greater
purity to me."[95] Although he
took all the blame upon himself,
Gandhi appears incredibly
obtuse in assuming that Nayar
had no reason to feel disturbed
or unhappy about the
psychological effects of her
intimate relations with him.

Sushila Nayar was away


from the ashram for long
periods for her medical
education. When she finished,
Gandhi begged her to return as
the ashram's doctor. He was
upset that she now refused to be
called his daughter, and he
called his daughter, and he
urged her, without her
preconditions, to "rush to me
and become one with me."[96]
Reading the dozens of letters
exchanged during this time, it is
clear that Nayar was still very
troubled about what happened
at Sevagram. She wrote that she
would return only on
"conditions," which were that
she would not have to give
Gandhi "service." Nayar
reluctantly submitted to
Gandhi's indomitable will in
September, 1940. While he was
in Delhi, she did give him a
massage, but she came to him
"with great difficulty." She also
sent him a letter beforehand,
which he described as "hurtful."
While describing himself as
unhappy, he acknowledged that
Nayar was suffering "deep
misery."[97] It looked as if
Nayar could have succeeded in
tearing herself away from
tearing herself away from
Gandhi's possessive domination,
just as his earlier intimates had,
but she did eventually return to
him and was with him and
Manu in East Bengal.

Although Gandhi declared


that he, compared to other men,
could take greater liberty" with
women, and that no woman
"has been harmed by contact
with me or been prey to lustful
thoughts,"[98] there is sufficient
evidence to prove that Gandhi's
experiments had a deleterious
effect on his female intimates'
mental health. There was
intense competition among the
women for Gandhis attention.
For example, Lilavati Asar and
Amtul Salaam were very jealous
of Sushila Nayar, and Gandhi
promised Asar that he would

stop sleeping with Nayar


stop sleeping with Nayar
because of her anger.

Gandhi was always inclined


to blame others for not
understanding the unique
nature of his experiments. In
1940 Gandhi admitted that the
"atmosphere here [Sevagram]
cannot be said to be natural for
anyone," but nevertheless the
conflict was caused by those
who were not properly
"absorbed" in it. Those who had
learned "master the
atmosphere" could live at
Sevagram "comfortably and
grow."[99] Several visitors
attested to definite signs of
psychological turmoil among
Gandhi's women companions.
In 1947 Swami Ananda and
Kedar Nath, two visitors with
substantial spiritual credentials,

queried Gandhi as follows:


queried Gandhi as follows:
"Why do we find so much
disquiet and unhappiness
around you. Why are your
companions emotionally
unhinged?"[100] Raihana
Tyabji observed that the more
Gandhi's young women "tried to
restrain themselves and repress
their sexual impulses . . . the
more oversexed and sex-
conscious they became."[101]

After learning of the


experiments, Bose wrote that he
would "never tempt [himself]
like that; nor would my respect
for a womans personality
permit me to treat her as an
instrument of an experiment
undertaken only for my own
sake."[102] He was also
concerned about the womens
emotional health: "Whatever
may be the value of the prayog
may be the value of the prayog
[experiment] on Gandhijis own
case, it does leave mark of
injury on the personality of
others who are not of the same
moral stature as he himself is,
and for whom sharing in
Gandhijis experiment is no
spiritual necessity."[103]

Bose was also concerned


about Gandhis own emotional
state, observing that Sushila
Nayars presence brought him
out of his normal "unruffled"
composure. On December 17,
1946 at 3:20 AM, Bose heard two
loud slaps and "deeply
anguished cry" from Gandhis
sleeping quarters. He went in to
find both Nayar and Gandhi in
tears.[104] Bose had assumed
that Gandhi had slapped Nayar,
but she insisted that Gandhi had
hit himself on the forehead
hit himself on the forehead
twice, a physical form of
Gandhis "self-suffering" that
Manu had witnessed as well.
Bose also mentions an unnamed
woman "Z," who "was not
always disinterested in her
relations with" with Gandhi,
and who also upset him and
distracted him from his political
work.[105]

VI

Gandhi can be seen as part

and parcel of a radical

transformation of Indian

political and religious thought


that began with Rammohun Roy

(1772-1833) and the Bengali

Renaissance. Roy responded to

British colonialism with what I

call a "reverse" Orientalism, and

he and other like minded Indian

intellectuals, bolstered by

European scholarship, claimed


that behind the shroud of a

corrupt popular Hinduism there

lay rational, monotheistic

religion equal to, if not greater,

than Christianity. Roy and those

who followed him targeted sati,

idol worship, and animal

sacrifice to the Goddess as


particularly degenerate

accretions to the pure

philosophy of the Vedas and the

Upanishads. Although many

rejected that idea of the Aryan

invasion, many Indian

intellectuals nonetheless turned

the Indo-European linguistic


theory into a racial theory of

indigenous high caste (=Aryan)

superiority over the colonizers.

Although Roy rejected Kali

worship in a dramatic way, he

recommended the Mahanirvana

Tantra as an antidote to the left-


handed Tantra that was

prevalent in Bengal. Urban has

investigated the origins of this

text and has determined that it

was most likely written in the

late 18th Century (perhaps

1775).[106] The author


obviously wished to present a

sanitized version of Tantra to

ameliorate British concerns and

to incorporate a significant

Indian, especially Bengali,

tradition. The most suspicious

aspect of this Tantra is that the


ruling deity is not the Durga or

Kali but an impersonal

Brahman. Chapter Seven of the

text, however, does feature Kali,

but not in her violent form;

rather, she is "the ocean of

nectar of compassion . . . whose


mercy is without limit," and the

"possessor of beautiful

ornaments, adorable as the

image of all tenderness, with a

tender body."[107] The five

forbidden things (meat, fish,

wine, parched grain, and sexual


union) are mentioned

"euphemistically" and Tantric

sex is performed exclusively

with ones wife. The text also

recommends intercaste

marriage based on mutual

consent of the partners.


One of the most significant

results of the Bengali

Enlightenment was the

Ramakrishna mission, which

now offers social and spiritual

services at 137 offices all over

the world. Ramakrishnas


followers have tried to

deemphasize his Tantric

connections, but the influence

was intimate and profound.

Ramakrishna's first major

spiritual teacher was a woman

called the Bhairavi Brahmani,


who taught a mixture of Tantra

and Bengali Vaishnavism. There

are two radically opposed

camps of interpretation of

Ramakrishna's experience with

the five Ms (mamsa, matsya,

madya, mudra, and maithuna)--


mischievously translated by

Doniger as the five F's--flesh,

fish, fermented grapes,

frumentum, and fornication.

[108] On the one hand, there is

Saradananda who claimed that

Ramakrishna completely
refused to participate, thereby

legitimizing the view that being

Kali's child is spiritually

superior to the decadent state of

being her lover. On the other

hand, Datta's belief that

Ramakrishna "easily performed


all of these obscene and horrific

rites with the Bhairavi."[109]

Jeffrey Kripal, author of

Kalis Child, believes that the

truth lies somewhere in

between. He concludes that

Ramakrishna passed the first M

in its most horrific form: eating


rotten human flesh. Fulfilling

the second M was not that

difficult for Bengalis, for they

have a great passion for fish, but

Ramakrishna ate it in the

Tantric way--boiled in a human

skull. Ramakrishna fudged on

the third M: so great was his


aversion to wine that he was

only able to touch his tongue to

a drop of it.

The most notorious M--ritual

intercourse--proved to be

Ramakrishna's greatest

problem. All that Ramakrishna


could manage was to sit on the

virgin's lap, crying out for

Mother, and falling into

samadhi. Ramakrishna

interpreted the event as follows:

"In the Tantras there is talk

about the left-handed practice


with a woman, but this is not

good. . . . I performed the

worship of the sixteen-year-old

girl in the child state. I saw that

her breasts were Mother's

breasts, that her vagina was

Mother's vagina."[110] Kripals


main thesis is that Ramakrishna

remained forever Kalis child

never the mature Tantric hero.

Returning to Gandhis

Tantricism, we can make some

instructive observations. Both

he and Ramakrishna were


married, and both experienced

intimate relations with virgin

girls. (Kumar notes insightfully

that both Gandhi and

Ramakrishna was "compulsively

tactile" with Gandhi's constant

touching of young women and


Ramakrishna's caressing of his

disciples.) Ramakrishnas child

bride was later elevated as the

"Holy Mother Sarada Devi." She

is now an equal person in what

the Ramakrishna Mission calls

"Holy Trinity," consisting of her,


Ramakrishna, and Vivekananda.

Until her death in 1920, Sarada

Devi was considered the

adopted mother of the

remaining disciples, and today

she is revered as a "human, yet

divine" saint,[111] an obvious


manifestation of shakti. While

Ramakrishna was involved in

an actual Tantric rite, Gandhi

was operating in a quasi-Tantric

context. The most important

difference, however, is that

Manu and the other young


women played the child role,

while Gandhi claimed victory, at

least during this period, as a

mature yogin, a true master of

sexual desire.

As a young revolutionary in

Calcutta, Sri Aurobindo and his


associates represented a radical

political manifestation of the

Bengali Renaissance. Outraged

by the ill-fated partition of

Bengal in 1905, underground

groups formed and executed

terrorist acts against the British


government. Aurobindo most

likely composed the oath taken

by many of these

revolutionaries, whose final act

was to lift a sword to Kali. In

another text Aurobindo phrases

Kalis disposition as follows:


"Offer sacrifice to me. Give for I

am thirsty. [It is I] who . . .

hungers to enjoy the heads and

bodies of mighty rulers."[112]

Kalis ugliness and violence was

blamed on the colonial powers,

which brought out the wrath of


the great goddess who now

sanctioned revolutionary action

by her devotees.

In Aurobindos mature
philosophy the Tantric elements
are clear, complete with Tantric
terms such as sadhaka (Tantric
aspirant) and sadhana (Tantric
practice). The primordial being
of Aurobindo's Shakta
cosmogony is Mahashakti, the
transcendent Universal Mother,
who "descends" as the Tantric
polarity of Ishvara-Shakti,
which expresses itself as the
purusha-prakriti dualism in the
nescient world. P. B. Saint-
Hilaire explains Aurobindo's
Hilaire explains Aurobindo's
view most aptly:

Purusha and Prakriti are

separate powers, while

Ishvara and Shakti are

contained in each other. . .

. Purusha is the true

being. . . in ordinary man,

he is covered by the ego


and by the ignorant play

of . . . Prakriti, and

remains veiled as a

"witness" which upholds

and observes the play of

Ignorance. When he

emerges, he is perceived
at first as a calm,

immovable

consciousness, detached

from the play of Nature.

Thereafter he gradually

asserts himself as the


sovereign Master of

Prakriti.[113]

The traditional assertive

Durga/Kali dominating an inert

Shiva is replaced by a dipolar

Shiva-Skakti pair committed to

right-handed Tantra.
Aurobindo, and even Gandhi,

would agree with Shaiva

Siddhanta, one of whose texts

reads: "Shiva generates Shakti,

and Shakti generates Shiva.

Both in their happy union

produce the worlds and souls.


Still Shiva is [ever] chaste and

the sweet-speeched Shakti is

[ever] a virgin."[114] Gandhis

view of pure satyagrihis who

conceived of shakti as the

embodiment of ahimsa would

prove to be the most effective


form of Indian nationalism and

arguably the best form of

conflict resolution known to

humankind. Gandhis spiritual

universalism, however, owes

much to Aurobindo and other


thinkers of the Bengali

Renaissance.

It is significant that

Aurobindo takes a Western

Jewish woman, Mira Richards,

as his shakti, consciously or

unconsciously bringing East and


West together just as Gandhi did

in his own ways. When

Aurobindo claimed that he and

Richards "were one but in two

bodies,"[115] he is embracing

the right-handed Tantra that is

described above. (We are


assuming that, as in Gandhis

case, Aurobindo had no sexual

relations with his Tantric

consort, although their rooms

adjoined one another.) In

contrast to Gandhi, Aurobindo

saw no need to prove his


spiritual purity by sleeping with

young virgins. In Ramakrishna,

Aurobindo, and Gandhi we see

also a sweet and gentle goddess,

not the militant and ugly Kali of

the Bengali nationalists. It could

be argued that both Aurobindo


and Gandhi, as least from the

standpoint of a masculinized

Shakta theology, became mature

Tantric yogis, while

Ramakrishna never left the

child state of what Freudians

would call a pregenital


sexuality. As opposed to

Gandhi, Ramakrishna did not

appear to know the temptation

of sexual attraction, unless

Kripals thesis of Ramakrishnas

homoerotic tendencies can be

supported.
In conclusion, if we can

call Gandhi a Tantric, then it

is a very unique

nonritualistic, nonesoteric

practice combining aspects

of both left- and right-

handed Tantric schools. It


also must be said, no matter

how much we want to hold

Gandhi in the highest

esteem, that there is

sufficient evidence to

conclude that Gandhi was

inconsistent in his
justifications for his sexual

experiments and not

completely sincere in

carrying them out. This

would then lead one to

question whether these

experiments were a spiritual


necessity or simply a

personal indulgence and

abuse of power. If the goal

of the true Tantric is to

transform desire into

something sacred, then

personally I am less and less


certain that Gandhi achieved

this goal. As Aldous Huxley

once said: "The professional

Don Juan destroys his spirit

as fatally as does the

professional ascetic, whose

[mirror] image he is."[116]

ENDNOTES
[1]Letter to R. A. Kaur, March
18, 1947.

[2]Quoted in Ved Mehta,


Mahatma Gandhi and His
Apostles (Harmondsworth,
Middlesex: Penquin Books,
1976), p. 213. I rely heavily on
Mehta for two reasons: (1) his
book was well received and
republished by Yale University
Press; and (2) he sought out all
the living Gandhian associates
and interviewed them
extensively.

[3]Quoted in Girja Kumar,


Brahmacharya: Gandhi and His
Women Associates (New Delhi:
Vitasta Publishing, 2006), p. 90.

[4]The Collected Works of


Mahatma Gandhi (New Delhi:
Government of India
Publications, 1958), vol. 93, p.
340.

[5]Jawaharlal Nehru, Selected


Works (New Delhi: Orient
Longman, 1974), p. 349.

[6]Aldous Huxley, Do What You


Will (New York: Doubleday,
1928), p. 45.

[7]William Bartley, Wittgenstein


(Chicago: Open Court, 2nd ed.,
1985).

[8]Quoted in Mehta, p. 203.

[9]Jeffrey Kripal, Kalis Child


(Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1993).

[10]Gandhi, Young India 8


(January 21, 1926), p. 30.

[11]Quoted in Mehta, p. 211.

11aGeoffrey Ashe, Gandhi: A


Study of Revolution, (London:
Heineman, 1968), p. 370.

[12]Collected Works, vol. 79, p.


301.

[13]Ibid., vol. 96, p. 183.

[14]See Mehta, p. 201.

[15]Kumar, p. 294.

[16]Nirmal Kumar Bose, My


Days with Gandhi (New Delhi:
Orient Longman, 1974), p. 2.

[17]Pyarelal Nayar, Mahatma


Gandhi: The Last Phase
(Ahmedabad: Navajivan, 2nd
ed., 1966), vol. 1, bk. 2, p. 229.
[18]Gopi Krishna, "Mahatama
Gandhi and the Kundalini
Proces" (Institute of
Consciousness Research, 1995)
at
http://www.icrcanada.org/gandhi.htm
(accessed on June 11, 2006). All
the citations are from the
second section of the essay.

[19]Gandhi, Key to Health, trans.


Sushila Nayar (Ahmedabad:
Navajivan Trust, 1948), p. 24.
Krishnas English translation
differs significantly from this
one, so I wonder if he is citing
the same text. He himself gives
no reference.

[20]Cited in Bose, p. 171.

[21]Pyarelal, p. 214.
[22]Gandhi, Womans's Role in
Society (Ahmedabad: Navajivan
Publishing, 1959), p. 8.
[23]Gandhi, Harijan (November
14, 1936), p. 316). "Woman is the
incarnation of ahimsa. Ahimsa
means infinite love, which again
means infinite capacity for
suffering" (Harijan [February
24, 1940], p. 13.
[24]Cited in Martin Green,
Gandhi: Voice of a New
Revolution (New York:
Continuum, 1993), p. 261.

[25]Quoted in Mehta, p. 213.

[26]Bose, p. 177. Mrs. Polak


noted a Atrait of sexlessness@
even in his South Africa days
(Gandhiji as We Know Him, ed.
Ch. Shukla [Bombay, 1945], p.
47). A Mrs. Shukla said that
Athere are some things relating
to our lives that we women can
speak of . . . with no man . . . .
But while speaking to Gandhiji
we somehow forgot the fact that
he was a man@ (C. Shukla,
Gandhiji=s View of Life [Bombay,
1951], p. 199). See also The Last
Phase, vol. 1, p. 595; 2nd ed., vol.
1, bk. 2, p. 234.
[27]Cited in Metha, p. 44.

[28]Pyarelal, p. 585. This story


may have variations, but the
one that I read clearly indicated
that the Gopis were
embarrassed to come out of the
Yamuna River and redeem their
saris for a kiss from Krishna.
Radha of course was the single
exception.

[29]Ibid., pp. 219, 220.

[30]Brian K. Smith, "Eaters,


Food, and Social Hierarchy in
Ancient India," Journal of the
American Academy of Religion
58:2 (Summer, 1990), pp. 177,
178.
[31]Gandhi, Harijan (July 23,
1938), p. 192.

[32]V. S. Gupta, "Gandhi and the


Mass Media" at http://mkgandhi-
arvodaya.org/mass_media.htm,
visited on May 30, 2006.
[33]Quoted in Pyarelal, p. 217.

[34]Gandhi's Letters to Ashram


Sisters, ed. K. Kalelkar and
trans. A. L. Mazmudar
(Ahmedadbad: Navajivan, 2nd
rev. ed., 1960), p. 94.

[35]Hsi Lai, The Sexual


Teachings of the White Tigress:
Secrets of Female Taoist Masters
(Rochester, VT: Destiny Books,
200), p. 16. Lai states that he
became interested in "the
matter of transformational sex"
by reading about Gandhi's
experiments.

[36]Pyarelal, p. 223.

[37]As told to Bose, pp. 149-50.

[38]Devi-Mahatyma, 1.59
(Coburn translation).

[39]Agehananda Bharati, The


Tantric Tradition (Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 1965), p. 202.

[40]Brahmavaivarta Purana,
Rakriti-Khanda 55.87, trans.
Tracy Pintchman, The Rise of
the Goddess in the Hindu
Tradition (Albany, NY: SUNY
Press, 1994), p. 164.

[41]Bharati, p. 236.

[42]Collected Works, vol. 87, p.


13. Compare this with the
Tantric yogi who said "Let my
kinsmen revile me. . . let people
ridicule me on sight . . . ." (cited
in Bharati, p. 238).

[43]"Thousands of Hindu and


Moslem women come to me.
They are to me like my own
mother, sisters, and daughters.
But if an occasion should arise
requiring me to share the bed
with any of them I must not
hesitate, if I am the
bramacharya that I claim to be.
If I shrink from the test, I write
myself down as a coward and a
fraud" (Collected Works, vol. 87,
p. 15).

[44]See Bharati, pp. 200, 202,


203. Other exceptions were an
active Shiva in Tamil Shaivism
and a static female in the
Markandeya Purana (p. 213).

[45]Hevajra Tantra, trans. D. L.


Snellgrove, excerpted in The
World of the Buddha, ed. Lucian
Stryk (New York: Grove Press,
1968), p. 311.

[46]See Buddha's Lions: The
Lives of the Eighty-Four Siddhas,
trans. and ed. James B. Robinson
(Berkeley: Dharma Publishing
Co., 1979).

[47]Bharati, p. 21.

[48]See N. F. Gier and Paul K.


Kjellberg, "Buddhism and the
Freedom of the Will" in Freedom
and Determinism: Topics in
Contemporary Philosophy, eds.,
J. K. Campbell, D. Shier, M.
ORourke (Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press, 2004), pp. 277-304. See
sections on Nagarjuna.

[49]Bharati, pp. 19, 200.

[50]Ibid., p. 20.

[51]Cited in Bose, p. 172.

[52]Collected Works, vol. 87, p.


14.

[53]Cited in Bose, p. 153.

[54]Gandhi, Harijan (June 29,


1947), p. 212.

[55]Quoted in Metha, p. 48.

[56]Douglas R. Brooks, The


Secret of the Three Cities: An
Introduction to Hindu Shakta
Tantrism (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1990), p. 58.

[57]Ibid., p. 69.

[58]Kumar, p. 90.

[59]See ibid., p. 97.

[60]Ibid., p. 317.

[61]Collected Works, vol. 96, p.


34.

[62]Kumar, pp. 145-46.

[63]Ibid., p. 152.

[64]Cited in ibid., p. 216.

[65]Collected Works, vol. 17, p.


375; vol. 16, p. 516.

[66]Ibid., vol. 16, p. 316.


"Spiritual wife" found in ibid.,
vol. 18, p. 130.

[67]Kumar, pp. 223, 218.

[68]Ibid., p. 225.

[69]Collected Works, vol. 18, pp.


20, 71.

[70]Ibid., vol. 35, p. 70.

[71]Ibid., vol. 47, p. 49.

[72]Ibid., vol. 67, p. 117.

[73]Ibid., vol. 93, p. 204.

[74]Ibid., pp. 335-36.

[75]See Kumar, p. 7.

[76]Collected Works, vol. 70, p.


220.

[77]Kumar, p. 288.

[78]Collected Works, vol. 87, pp.


13-14, 15. "Non-violence of the
brave" cited in Bose, p. 159.

[79]Quoted in Kumar, p. 321.

[80]Ibid., vol. 79, p. 238.

[81]Quoted in Metha, p. 203.

[82]Cited in Bose, p. 103.

[83]Cited in ibid., p. 134.

[84]Kumar, p. 331.

[85]Pyarelal, pp. 226, 238. In


letters to Mannalal G. Shah on
March 6 and 7, 1945, Gandhi
wrote equivocally: "As far as
possible I have postponed the
practice of sleeping together.
But it cannot be given up
altogether" (cited in Kumar, p.
8).

[86]Collected Works, vol. 93, p.


333.

[87]Quoted in Mehta, p. 203. The


question of whether Gandhis
touching of women was
appropriate had been raised as
early as 1935. His response
entitled "A Renunciation" can be
read in Harijan, September 21,
1935.

[88]Collected Works, vol. 67, pp.


104-5.

[89]Mark Thomson, Gandhi and


His Ashrams (Columbia, MO:
South Asia Books, 1993), p. 202.

[90]Collected Works, vol. 67, p.


117.

[91]Ibid., vol. 93, pp. 237-38.

[92]Pyarelal, Mahatma Gandhi:


The Last Phase (Ahmedabad:
Navajivan Publishing, 1st ed.,
1958), vol. 1, p. 588. "Now mere
abstention from sexual
intercourse cannot be termed
brahmacharya. So long as the
desire for intercourse is there,
one cannot be said to have
attained brahmacharya" (Key to
Health, p. 23).

[93]Cited in Bose, p. 171.

[94]Collected Works, vol. 93, p.


161.

[95]Ibid., p. 33.

[96]Ibid., p. 349. In a letter to


Sushila Nayar on August 5, 1940,
Gandhi states that one condition
of her return was "taking care of
[his] body," and he
acknowledged that this was not
acceptable to her (Collected
Works, vol. 93, p. 343).

[97]Ibid., pp. 364-66.

[98]Ibid., p. 333.

[99]Ibid., p. 338.

[100]Pyarelal, 2nd ed., vol. 1, bk.


2, p. 228.

[101]Quoted in Mehta, p. 211.

[102]Bose, p. 150.

[103]Ibid., p. 151.

[104]Ibid., p. 95.

[105]Ibid., p. 159.

[106]See Hugh Urban, Tantra:


Sex. Secrecy, Politics, and Power
in the Study of Religion
(Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press, 2003), p. 67.

[107]Mahanirvana Tantra 7.13,


22, cited in Urban, p. 65.

[108]Wendy Doniger, Foreward


in Edward C. Dimock, Jr., The
Place of the Hidden Moon
(Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1989), p. xiii; cited in
Kripal, p. 117.
[109]Kripal, p. 118.

[110]Kathamrita 2.62; 5.140-41


(trans., Kripal); see The Gospel of
Ramakrishna, p. 701.
[111]From the Ramakrishna
Mission website at
http://www.sriramakrishna.org/sdlife
accessed on June 9, 2006.

[112]Cited in Urban, p. 93.

[113]P. B. Saint-Hilaire, The


Future Evolution of Man
(Pondicherry: All India Press,
1963), p. 148.
[114]P. Nallaswami, Shivajana
Siddiyar 3.2.77; cited in R. C.
Zaehner, Evolution in Religion: A
Study in Sri Aurobindo and
Pierre Teihard de Chardin
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971),
p. 104.
[115]Cited in Urban, p. 101. It
seems that Aurobindo has not
left Tantra behind, as Urban
claims, but has simply
embraced a right-handed form
of it.

[116]Huxley, p. 45.

S-ar putea să vă placă și