Rating: 
Summary: The honesty in this book is absolutely relentless.
Review: As notable as they are, Gandhi's political successes are not what attracts me to this man.He had a sincere desire to know his own faults and arrogances (and to therefore, rid himself of them).This is the key to curing human relations.In my own life, this is what I look for in people.They don't even have to like me, so long as they are genuine in their attempt to see me as I truly am, and themselves for what they truly are.
Gandhi's infamous 'non-violence' beliefs and abstaining lifestyle sprout from this attitude.I think it is imperative that we realize that noble actions are the 'sprouts', whilst the courage to face one's own arrogances is the 'core' of successful humanity.I mean, what happens when the 'actions' are credited as core? eg.Many people express noble slogans like "NO RACISM", yet feel hateful whilst doing so, perhaps even desiring harm come to the racists.Isn't yielding a peaceful slogan whilst feeling hateful, putting across mixed messages? Gandhi expressed genuine compassion for his 'enemies'.He wanted them to learn, not hurt.Even if 'non-violence' is a noble slogan, it isn't guarenteed to have positive effects.A slogan-yielder must show genuine desire to learn of his own arrogances (and not just desire to point out the target's arrogances), otherwise -the target will feel that you expect more of him than you do of yourself (hence, he will inevitably rebel).Brainwashing (nasty word!) is ALWAYS negative, regardless of how well-intended the founding cause was.Hence, Gandhi's successful influence on people was actually founded in his attitude toward himself.He was well trusted by people because his 'lack of hateful feelings' corresponded with the 'words they heard him speaking'.
What is the true nature of non-violence? Gandhi obviously meant this spiritually, even though he applied it to physical actions.He is 100% correct that violence has no role in the spiritual realm.But physically? His physical application is undoubtedly a rebellion against the human habit passing off ill-intended action as acts of neccessity.(eg. Nazi's later would explain away their racial exterminations as "survival of the fittest").
My definition of survival (and 'competition'); "survival= gain for the self, at the least cost to all else".Humans currently neglect the "at the least cost to all else" part of the equation.And Gandhi rebelled against this neglect.But, in his abstainance he may have overshot, with the naturally occuring "gain for the self" part lagging behind.As selfish as that phrase may sound, it is only selfish if "in absence of the other part" of the equation.However, abstainance can be a great learning experience so long as it is free flowing and freely chosen, and isn't obsessive or guilt-driven.Gandhi did inherently abstain with nature/God/love in mind.But, it did eat away at him also.So, it wouldn't be accurate to say that he'd perfected a balance, despite getting many things right.Does all this mean I'm claiming he was incorrect? No.I'm merely claiming that his philosophy was incomplete.He made great spiritual progress, obviously.His advancement of humankind's understanding of physical combat's true role, is endlessly helpful.But to make sure his wisdoms don't go to waste, we mustn't sell ourselves short by assuming that we can't possibly add to his wisdom with our own (as if we daren't know something that he didn't).We need to allow ourselves to build on Gandhi's platform.That's the whole reason he set the platform.Not so we'd stagnate on it.
On a side note; I can relate to some reviewers using the word 'boring' to describe his writing (though I dare not use it myself, thru fear of UNhelpful votes.ha, ha).It's just that; Compassionate people are so determined not to feed arrogance into their world that -in abstaining their negative attributes, some of their positive ones can accidentally get caught up in the abstainance also.Hence the phenomenon "nice guys finish last".Nice people do risk 'being boring', in their efforts to not just -blurt out absolutely every (potentially destructive) urge that goes through their bodies and minds.So, I urge (controlledly 'urge', i assure:)) readers to be patient with him.You'll find no cheap comments here designed to 'pheign' being interesting.He much prefered to actually 'be' interesting.Much harder an art.
Rating:
Summary: Long Live Mahatma, Long Live the Nation
Review: Gandhiji was a person who believed in the dignity of man and left us all a legacy of ahimsa, love and tolerance. His life was guided by a search for truth. In the 'My Experiments of the Truth', Gandhiji stressed that truth was god and his aim in life was to achieve truthfulness in thought, word and deed. Ahimsa, to him was the highest virtue. By non violence, Gandhi meant not merely the absence of violence but also loving concern for all life. He believed that truth could be known only through tolerance and concern for others and that find a truthful way to solutions required constant testing. He taught that to be non-violent required great courage. He adopted Satyagraha based on principles of courage, non-violence and truth. This method was used to fight for India's independence and to bring about social change. The book has exceptional revelations of Gandhiji's own life, his experiences, his beliefs and the stepping stone of his career. A widely read and an inspiring collection, Gandhiji's Autobiography gives a glimpse into the Indian culture and living on path towards Truth & Non violence. A pick for every one who believes in peace n calm.
Rating:
Summary: A Gandhi Introduction.
Review: I approached this book with some trepidation as my Indian friends are divided in their attitude to Gandhi (some regard him almost as a saint, others are far more ambiguous). There's no doubting Gandhi's place as a major figure in twentieth century history, but would learning more about him create a good or disappointing image? I would start with a word of caution. This book only covers Gandhi's life from 1869 to 1921. Therefore I treated this book as an introduction to the man, a preparation for further reading. I suppose an equally legitimate method would be to adopt an opposite approach and start with a biography then finish with this book. I reflected that any comments I made here might only serve to reveal my ignorance of Indian culture and history - I'm sure I missed (or misinterpreted) many nuances. Full appreciation of this book may only be possible if you are either Indian or have a better knowledge than mine. Nonetheless, I found it an easy book to read - the short chapters helped me keep up a good pace. Indeed Gandhi's style is to pick episodes from his life and reflect on them. Although the book is written chronologically, it very much has a "dipping in and out" feel rather than a linear narrative. I was left with the impression that this man was no saint (and would have been horrified at the very thought). There were aspects of his character I found puzzling or frustrating: I've never been impressed by anyone who advocates physical self-denial after having produced a litter of offspring; much of the book is devoted to dietetics - a subject Gandhi was so obsessed with it affected his health very badly; and his treatment of his children was, well to be charitable, distinctly odd. I felt that there was a large amount of self-righteousness in the man, and an obsessive delight in self-denial. Yet withal, should we expect any human to be without fault, and how should Gandhi's faults be judged when compared with his role in securing Indian independence - without Satyagraha would it have been even more bloody than it was? That might be a better mounument to him than this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Reflection of his personality
Review: I have red the original version of this book - written by Gandhi in Gujarati, and two things are most noticeable: First is that he is very honest. He didn't try to hide things to make them look nice and good, neither he tried to exaggerate them to look spectacular and dramatic. He just put them as they were. Second is that his language is very simple, a reflection of his philosophy. His aim was to convey his thoughts, not to produce literary work, so he used simple style and simple words. He wanted reader to see what he had to say, not how it was said.
A great work.
Rating:
Summary: A great book.
Review: I truly learned quite a bit about Gandhi as a person from reading this book. But there was a need to include a short history of India during the Era around Gandhi's life. Why? Because Gandhi speaks about issues that India faced in his day, and as an American reader I didn't understand the issue nor the reason he took his stance on it. This reason is why I is a 4 stars book instead of five stars in my eyes.
Rating: 
Summary: I don't know
Review: I was a huge fan of Ghandi. I had read every article written about him. I had bought the movie that was made about him and now when I bought his autobiography and read it. I am more then dissapointed!
This great man didn't actually reveal his recipe clearly to future generations on how to be like him, peaceful and non-violent to insults and violence! Sadly I came across so many chapters when he wrote about Vegetarians clubs and books he read about diets.
It is only my 'at the moment' opinion but Ghandi about Ghandi didn't actually wrote that wisely. His writings about himself are simple yet very confusing and even boring. Anyways, I had great difficulties finishing Ghandi's Autobiography and usually I finish a book within two-three days at most. But of course this doesn't mean that you'd find this book the same way I did. So instead of recommending this book to you I'd reccommend you to read a couple of pages in random before you purchase it.
Rating:
Summary: Inspiring!
Review: If there is one book that makes you crave for more, and the search for Self-realization is definitely this one. This book explains the search of one mans' own and 'his' way of pursuit.
Rating:
Summary: Everyone should read this book
Review: In his own words, Gandhi takes us through some of the experiences in his life, with each chapter forming at least one important learning lesson to him. All experiences, whether good or bad, had a positive learning lesson on him and contributed to his goal of seeking the truth. One of his main beliefs was using non-violence as a means of protesting against acts of oppression and using international law to seek justice. This meant he never raised his fists or lowered himself to barbarism however much he was provoked, violated or attacked. In fact this seems to be the opposite attitude demonstrated by all terrorists and most countries (West, Middle East and East) where the belief is that violence and war works. As Gandhi says "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind". As we have now entered the third of the world wars, where the weapons are horrific and the consequences unimaginable, Gandhi's words have never been more important. All politicians and world leaders should read this book. In fact everyone should read this book.
Rating:
Summary: A transparent glimpse into the mind of a truly great soul
Review: In many ways, this is a somewhat unusual autobiography. It is as remarkable for what Gandhi decides to leave out as for what he includes. He obviously didn't intend to deal with every major event, and delve into every area. It is less a comprehensive narrative than it is a series of reflections on his life. Some have criticized the book because he often deals more intensely with questions about what kind of diet he would follow than many of the great historical achievements of his life. But Gandhi was who he was as an international figure because of who he was as an ethical individual. The moral seriousness with which he broods over his diet reveals a great deal about who he is as a person. As a side note, I should add that when I read this book, I had been thinking about becoming a vegetarian, and while I found no new arguments for doing so in this book, his moral example gave me the courage to do so. The greatest quality about this book is one it shares with most of Gandhi's writing: when he writes you get the sense that he is giving us his unedited thoughts. During even the greatest crises in his struggle for Indian independence, Gandhi's writings have the quality of a transcription of what he is thinking. More than any figure I can think of, Gandhi revealed precisely what he was thinking. The almost complete lack of artifice in his writing is one of the most impressive aspects of his writing as a whole and of his autobiography in particular. One is struck by his honesty, by his humility, and by his intense, almost overwhelming, moral passion. This is not a literary masterpiece. If one goes into it expecting it to rival such other autobiographies as Rousseau's CONFESSIONS or Nabokov's SPEAK, MEMORY or even Franklin's AUTOBIOGRAPHY, one will be disappointed. Although he was a prolific writer, Gandhi was not a great writer. He was unquestionably one of the towering figures of the 20th century, but it was because of what he did, not because of what he wrote. But for some of us, encountering so directly on the printed page such a fundamentally great soul can be close to overpowering.
Rating:
Summary: What the Truth Reveals
Review: In the book's introduction, Gandhi ascribes these words of the Hindu poet to himself: Where is there a wretch
So wicked and loathsome as I?
I have forsaken my Maker,
So faithless have I been. The cause of this wretchedness, Gandhi wrote, was "the evil passions within that keep me so far from Him, and yet I cannot get away from them." These thoughts echo those of the Apostle Paul who, while desiring to do good, found that evil worked within him. He bemoaned, "Oh wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death?" Both men realized they could not perform what the truth required, and because they loved truth, it made them feel wretched. Who then is righteous, if not Gandhi and Paul? The prophet Ezekial spoke of God's promise to "put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes." But such righteousness is seldom seen. Gandhi wrote disapprovingly of one Christian acquaintance "who knowingly committed transgressions, and showed me that he was undisturbed by the thought of them." Paul saw among his own converts in Corinth such immorality "that does not even exist among the heathens." The promise does not fail, but faith wavers. The promise must be put to the test, as an experiment with truth. Then those who love the Truth may be revealed.
|
