Boyfriend become boring? Well now you can dump him and feel good by invoking the Mahatma.

Just like Shweta Polanki who cited Gandhigiri as the reason she broke off with her boyfriend after he made hissing sounds to get the attention of the waiter. Murderer and extortionist on the way to trial, looking to get some media attention? No problemo. Hand out roses in a Lucknow courthouse ala Babloo Srivastava. [More here] If it was the Rang-de-Basanti-inspired be the change in early 2006 that captured the imagination of the nation, the last quarter has seen the the Return of Bapucourtesy Lage Raho Munnabhai, a predictable yet pleasant movie about a Don who reforms himself after being visited by the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi. The original Mahatma Gandhi, the master communicator, had to don a langoti and speak the language of religion and poverty to make a connection with Indias teeming population and launch the greatest mass mobilization in modern history. The new bubble-wrapped Mahtama of Bollywood has a new challengeto work his magic on the outsourced generation of today and rake in a few bucks for the producer Vidhu Vinod Chopra. Because the secret of todays blockbuster is to give the audience an illusion of intellectual nourishment while feeding him the same old escapist fareso that when he walks out from the multiplex he has a feel good rush and a desire to change the worlda desire that if we are lucky will last for a week. For Gandhi is the ultimate feel-good-mannothing makes the new generation feel better about themselves than acting Gandhian. But there is always a problemeverything Bapu has asked us to do is so god-damn tough and boring. Like shovelling your own shit.that is so not cool. Also the sex is a pathway to violent animal tendencies idea -nyet nyet. The go back to the villages whole anti-industrialization angleyou mean no cell phones and IPods? And that spin your own cloth Gandhian principle-dude are you crazy? Do you want me to be a fashion disaster like Karishma Kapoor in her first movie? Puleeze. So heres an idea. Get rid of the facets of Gandhi-ism that are uncomfortable or sound way too tough or too 1940-s. Lets get Bapu to talk Tapori. Lets make him a gentle Agony Uncle who guarantees the sure way to get the girl. There might not be a lot of the original Gandhi left in this new Gandhi but hey thats not our problem. The thing is to make people think they are having a karele ka juice that tastes sweet. Lets put in a few simple, contrived situations. Add some turn the other cheek and love your enemies homilies and voil , we have a product easily palatable, leaving a warm, fuzzy afterglow. But wait. On second thoughts- is this new-age, sanitized Gandhi altogether a bad thing? A commercial construct sure is. But perhaps this filtering out of the parts of Gandhiism that are impractical, utopian and plain anachronistic is the only way to keep Gandhi-ism relevant today. By making his ideals easier to follow. By serving up what he stood for in bite-sized portions. While most neo-Gandhibaadis who were Rang-de-Basantists a few months ago will soon migrate to other things, we hope that there will be a few people who, like Sanjay Dutt in Lage Raho Munnabhai, will ensconce themselves in a library where, through knowledge gleaned from books (as opposed to a two hour movie or email forwards) objectively evaluate, free of idolatory and iconcoclasm - Gandhi the person. Gandhi the politician. And Gandhi the personal saviour.

And through this path of enlightenment, triggered by Lage Raho Munnabhai but not limited by it, each of us shall realize Bapu in our own way.

But is Gandhis non-violence simply the stuff a good speech is made of? Today, India celebrates Gandhi Jayanti in a century defined by violence. Satyagraha and ahimsa are gone and violence is the new language of survival. So is Gandhian non-violence relevant today? Actor Farooque Sheikh, Chairman Jammu Kashmir People's Conference Sajjad Lone, Gandhian Scholar Dr Tridip Suhrud debated the issue on Face the Nation. Gandhi, the Mahatma Non-violence was Mahatma's greatest dream, as was welfare for those he called the Harijans. But now those very children of god who Gandhi loved have turned their back on peaceful protest. Now whether harijan or upper caste violence is second nature. It seems sad but the Gandhian philosophy is rather irrelevant in the Kashmir valley, said Sajjad Lone. We have seen a lot of violence there. Although there has been a concept of dialogues, reconciliation as a way of resolving conflicts but Im afraid its not really gone too far, he added. The country that won its independence because of non-violence is now turning into a violent force, said the politician. Also, one look at entertainment industry shows that the hero of today is more or less a violent figure. But is it necessary to portray violence to acquire a heroic status in the industry. Cinema reflects the society. If we have a society that believes there are short cuts to material success, people might think that using fist is the best way to get it done. But at the same time we have the classic example of Munnabhai which exemplifies Gandhian philosophy, said Farooque Sheikh. Munnabhai as a film was not really about non-violence because in fact it was the story of a gangster who chooses non-violence. The crux of the film was that whether he began with the gun or without it, he ultimately came around and got convinced with the Gandhian philosophy, said Farooque Sheikh.

Gandhi had a certain spiritual strength, and it was this strength that the single most powerful nation at that time had to retreat, he added. Was Gandhi seen as a saint? Does the Gandhian forum of non-violent protest require a saint at the figurehead? Do we need a saintly figure at the top to impress the society with a moral authority? What is required is an individual capable of deep soul searching. One has to have a clear concept of fearlessness. All the people who participated in the freedom struggle were not necessarily saints. But they were capable of a certain amount of self-reflection, said Gandhian Scholar Dr Tridip Suhrud. The question is are we capable of practicing ahimsa? The question is not whether the Gandhi is relevant or not, he pointed out. British were impressed with the moral righteousness of Gandhi. On being asked whether it would be possible to have a Gandhian movement in Kashmir, Sajjad Lone said, In Kashmir there was a classical case where both non-violence as a mode of resolving conflict and non-violence has been utilized. The signals emanating from the ground are that India reacts to violent methods not aspirations. Thats a dangerous trend. Thats when the Gandhian philosophy becomes rather irrelevant in Kashmir. Thus in the 21st century is if you want attention and your chief say, unfortunately its the way of violence that the governments of today understand. Non-violence irrelevant> We have seen a lot of violence over the past 17-years. When its a question of a territory, the state reacts with a brute force. I dont see how one could bring in this non-violent concept. Because in the end its a vicious circle, said Lone. Is Mahatma Gandhi an irrelevant concept in Kashmir? Gandhi was a great man. But once you have seen bloodshed open and explicit, its very difficult to see how Gandhian concepts would be relevant there, he added. The kind of burden that Satyagraha places, the spiritual cleansing and battle for the opponents mid, isnt that way too utopian? Whether it is Satyagraha or any other method of self assertion, one must ask what constitutes the self of my society. Gandhis non-violence is also a response to a stark and everyday violence that he experienced. Gandhis ideas are not utopian. They are valid today and will hold meaning till the end, said Dr Tridip Suhrud. The popular notion is that manhood is tied up with physical force and violence. That Gandhi was an aberration in India where male is seen as someone who asserts his manhood through physical force. The kind of ahimsa that Gandhi talked about required extraordinary courage. It was not the response of a person who was weak or even slightly lacking in courage. The problem is who is propagating these ideas today. Gandhi had said my life is my message. Ask

anybody in Kashmir or anywhere in India if there is one single leader who could say the same, said Faruq Sheikh. Gandhi was exceptional and an extraordinary human being which is why he was able to lead a non-violent movement. However, today, because we dont have an extraordinarily strong human being like him, that kind of a movement is not possible. Final Verdict: Is Gandhian non-violence relevant today? 50 per cent said yes. 50 per cent said no.

Tomorrow 2nd October is Gandhi Jayanti. To mark this day India declared tomorrow as holiday. This shows the importance India and Indians give to Gandhiji even after his 139th birthday. Is Gandhiji having relevance anymore and are his teachings and principles viable now in the current turmoil we are facing in India? I think not and I think his teachings have no value and relevance anymore. This end to his teachings came not only immediately after his death but soon after the independence of India when he was put behind the curtains by the very Congressmen headed by his right hand man Nehru after gaining all the benefits from his frail self and mighty intelligence. We have discarded his teachings and embraced the teachings and principles of Hitler, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein and devil. That we rejected his teachings are known from the fact that Gandhis own co-religionists have disgraced their own religion and Gandhism in India and embraced Criminalism. The attacks on innocent and peace loving Christians in India by the Hindu fanatics is a great slap on the principles of Gandhiji. On 2nd October we as traitors will be paying lip service to the sacrifices and principles of Gandhiji by showering eulogy on him. But is it important to praise Gandhiji without imbibing his principles of non-violence? By killing innocent Christians, why innocents only, by killing and destroying others, Hindu fanatics are doing disservice to Gandhiji and for all the sacrifices he made for the cause of India and Indians. Indians are not only Hindus. Other religious communities in India are also Indians and Indian Christians are very much a part of India. I am surprised how overwhelming majority of Hindus is keeping their silence over the atrocities committed on their Indian Christian brothers and sisters. Nonviolence is the major

principle of Hinduism and making its use Gandhiji shook the British Empire into surrender. I cannot understand how my Hindu brothers are accepting the modus operandi in violence of killing Christians in India by their fellow Hindus! When I observe their silence I feel they accept the butchery of Christians by the Hindu fanatics. Gandhiji always supported the weaker section and minorities. He once said in one of his writings that 'the society that ill treats its weaker segment is a sick society'. This sick society is the Hindu fanatic society which requires medical treatment. The Government of India under Dr. Sing and Sonia Gandhi is a weak Government. There will be under this Government more threats for Christians because Hindu fanatics have already noticed the weakness in our Government at the Centre and in the States. We must spit at the Government officials and Ministers when they make eulogy of Gandhijis principles on 2nd October. They have no right to talk in praise of Gandhiji. They have killed Gandhijis principles by allowing Hindu fanatics to kill and destroy Christians in India. We must not attend Gandhi Jayanti functions where these people are going to preside. We must tell them loudly and openly that STOP CELEBRATING GANDHI JAYANTI BECAUSE YOU ARE TRAITORS WHILE GANDHIJI IS NOT. YOU ARE TOO SMALL TO TALK ON GANDHIJI WHO WAS TOO BIG FOR YOU. YOU ARE NOT WORTHY TO TAKE THE NAME OF GANDHIJI ON YOUR UNWORTHY TONGUE. Those in the Central Government and in the State Governments who are guilty of allowing atrocities against Christians will be making a mockery of Gandhiji if they celebrate Gandhi Jayanti on 2nd October i.e. tomorrow. They are not worthy of Gandhiji.