An Analysis upon Participation of Mahatma Gandhi in Indian Freedom Struggle

INTRODUCTION

Indian history has seen extraordinary reformers who not only established the very foundation of modern India but also made an impact on the world with their philosophy and great work for the society. A reform movement is a kind of social movement that aims to make gradual change, or change in certain aspects of society rather than rapid or fundamental changes. The word social reformers itself says that reform India into a developing country, i.e., make India into a developing country. A reform movement is distinguished from more radical social movements such as revolutionary movements. Decades come and go but what remain are the impression and great acts of the social reformers. Reformists‘ ideas are often grounded in liberalism, although they may be rooted in Utopian, socialist or religious concepts. Some rely on personal transformation; others rely on small collectives, such as Mahatma Gandhi's spinning wheel and the self-sustaining village economy, as a mode of social change. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, who later came to be known as Mahatma Gandhi, was born as the son of this Karamchand Gandhi and his wife, Putlibai. Putlibai also came from the trading community. She had not received much education. But she was very knowledgeable about social affairs and matters of court, and could participate intelligently in the talks and discussions that took place among the ladies of the Royal Court. She was a devout Hindu, and used to visit the Haveli or temple regularly. Gandhi used to accompany her to the temple, although, he admitted, he was not attracted by the pomp and show and the goings on in the temple. But what left a lasting mark on Gandhi's mind was the genuine piety of his mother, her profound faith in God, and her unswerving determination to take and adhere to even the hardest of vows in the pursuit of her religious beliefs. To cite an instance, in the rainy season, she would vow not to take her meals till she saw the sun, and would often have to go without food because the sun disappeared behind clouds by the time her children who had spotted the fugitive shouted to her, and she came out to see the sun herself. The Indian Freedom Struggle was one of the largest democratic movements against imperialism and colonialism. The Indian Freedom Struggle provides the best examples of nationalism and patriotism which may be adopted and pursued in order to root out the undemocratic institutions of colonialism. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, popularly known as ‗Mahatma Gandhi‘ or Bapu was a moral reformist. It is widely accepted that Gandhi was the back bone of the non-violent struggle for freedom of India. Gandhi was influenced by the political ideas of Gopal Krishna and considered him as his ―Political well to the others. Gita taught him to render selfless service. From David Thoreau, he borrowed the idea of civil disobedience and from Leo Tolstoy the idea of solving problems with love. Gandhi played a pivotal role in the India‘s struggle for freedom. Gandhi‘s emergence as the undisputed leader of the Indian National Congress is an interesting story by itself. After twenty years‘ stay in Africa, Gandhi returned to India in 1914. The freedom struggle in the nineteen thirties took many steps forward. The decade started with the Second non-cooperation movement under Gandhi‘s leadership. The terrorist activities gave great impetus to the freedom struggle. The Government felt the need of a fresh review of the political situation in India. Gandhi was more concerned with the internal reform of the Indian society than with the expulsion of the Britishers from India. The colonial and imperial considerations and interests forced the viceroy Lord Irwin to ignore the Eleven points put forwarded by Gandhi. And thus Gandhi was left no alternative other than the launching of the Civil Disobedience Movement. In this phase of the nationalist movement turned into a more meaningful struggle which is only for the freedom rather than reforms or development. During this period a new era has been initiated in history of nationalist movement with the emergence of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948) in the Indian politics. He became the cardinal personality in the life of the Indian. Under his guidance the nationalist struggle turned into a mass struggles for freedom of all times. This finally forced the British to leave India. In 1915, Mahatma Gandhi returned to India after twenty years in South Africa. In South Africa, he developed a philosophy called ―Satyagraha‖ which he often translated loosely as ―Soul-force ―or Non-violence. Arriving in India for some months he traveled throughout the country and observed the conditions of the country and countrymen. After that he took an active part in the independence movement people and at first of visited Represented. Mahatma Gandhi soon launched a series of movements amongst the peasants. Mahatma Gandhi sat with them in hunger strikes and took part in their marches. His efforts in most cases proved successful, for he was able to get the government to agree to some of their demands, and more importantly he was able to mobilize mass support. Soon this idea spread across the country, the Indian people no longer submitted passively to British rule and began opposing it. Meanwhile the government was keen to suppress this movement, for they were occasionally they even fired on unarmed protesters. On the sixth of April 1919, a terrible incident took place in a garden called JallianwalaBagh, in Amritsar, Punjab. Responding to a call by Mahatma Gandhi, a large group of peaceful unarmed people gathered in the garden to protest against the arrest of their leaders and speak out against the British rule. JallianwalaBagh while a large garden, had only one narrow exit. General Dyer, a British military commander of Amritsar entered with his troops into the garden. The third phase of the nationalist movement would mark the beginning of one of the greatest mass struggles for freedom of all time. Millions of Indians, under the leadership of Mahatma Gandhi would embark on a non-violent struggle, which finally would force the British to leave India. The stage for such developments had been set in the previous phase, as extremists dominated the movement. For instance during World War I, Britain had taken the aid of a number of its colonies, including India and had promised some form of self-government in return. After the war however, these promises were quickly forgotten and the Indian people thus felt betrayed. As a halfhearted measure the British introduced the Montagu-Chelmford Reforms, which led to the Government of India act of 1919. These reforms gave the Indians some power, but this sort of concessions no longer satisfied the nationalists. Mahatma Gandhi launched a Civil Disobedience Movement on the 12th of March 1930, with his famous Dandi march. The British government had for a long time had a law which forbade Indians to make their own salt. They had also levied a massive tax on salt, making it an expensive commodity. Salt was an essential commodity and hence these high prices caused much difficulty for Indians. The Dandi march symbolized the beginning of civil disobedience, the refusal of the Indian people to follow British made laws. Mahatma Gandhi walked three hundred and seventy five kilometres with his followers to the village of Dandi on the coast of Gujrat. Hundreds of people joined his march en-route. The gathering then made salt from the sea, symbolizing their refusal to abide by the law. Soon the movement spread across the country, the salt law was broken at several other places as well. Once again people joined in demonstrations, a campaign against foreign goods and the refusal to pay taxes. The movement involved all sections of the Indian people, with women playing an important role. The effects even spread to the Indian members of the British army, who now began violating orders to shoot at unarmed demonstrators. The government response to the struggle was typical, the top

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was the greatest leader of the Indian independence movement in British-ruled India. Employing nonviolent civil disobedience, Gandhi led India to independence and inspired movements for civil rights and freedom across the world. He is popularly known as Bapu (father of nation) who dominated the national movement of India from 1919 to 1947. He was an apostle of peace, non-violence and was ardent follower of Purna Swaraj or complete independence. His message has a universal appeal which has profound influence on humanity till now. On Gandhi‘s influence in Indian politics Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru wrote ―Gandhi‘s influence is not limited to those who agree with him or accept him as national leader, it extends to those who disagree with him and criticize him, at a time of action and struggle when India‘s freedom is at stake they flock to him and look up to him as their inevitable leader‖. Gandhian ideology was an outcome of the synthesis of both moderate and extremist thoughts. The different social and political works of the moderates and extremists did not worry Mahatma Gandhi as he considered politics as a method for social change. He had a vision of Swaraj and his concept of Swaraj was just like Rama Rajya or kingdom of God on the earth. During the period when Gandhi‘s freedom movement acquired its mass base, he again and again defined and explained the concept of Swaraj as the goal of freedom struggle, in terms of political, economic, social and moral rights of the downtrodden and exploited Indian masses. The twentieth century marked with widespread national movement. It has been featured as a century of widespread democratic upsurge. The first half of the century started movement to overthrow the colonialism in Afro-Asian countries due to liberation struggles. By that time, India witnessed a freedom movement. In that Mahatma Gandhi had a pivotal role. He used non-violent direct action Satyagraha as a technique of protest. The Indian freedom movement led by Mahatma Gandhi which used non-violent direct action Satyagraha as a technique of struggle, won general acclaim for the pioneering role it played in sharpening and hastening the process of dismantling the classical forms of colonialism and imperialism. The middle part of the century witnessed post-colonial transformation in the newly independent Afro-Asian states. There was a massive attempt for presumption of the states as an effective mediator in improving the conditions of the weaker and poorer sections of people. For the purpose of ensuring social justice and equality, the liberator of the oppressed wanted to work ―an engine of growth and development that would usher in a new civil order some disillusionment and demystification. The state initiated her expectations of the positive and interventionist role. And the people presumed alliance between the state and the masses have been completely belied.

Thomas Weber (2001), holds that it is puzzling that links between Gandhian social philosophy and recent conflict resolution/negotiation literature, especially given the latter‘s Gandhian ‗flavour‘, have received so little scholarly attention. While there seems to be no direct causal link between the two bodies of knowledge, conflict resolution literature in the guise of modern problem-solving and win-win (as opposed to power-based and zerosum) approaches leading to integrative conflict resolution (as opposed to mere compromise and distributive outcomes) strongly echoes Gandhi"s own writings and the analyses of some Gandhi scholars. This is especially true in the case of non-mainstream writings that see conflict resolution techniques as potentially being about more than the solution of immediate problems that see a broader personal and societal transformation as the ultimate goal. This article explores these connections and argues that Gandhian satyagraha should be squarely located within conflict resolution discourse. Makrand Mehta (2005), on his return to Ahmedabad after successful experiments with satyagraha in South Africa, Gandhi rediscovered and strove to revive Ahmedabad"s business-oriented yet pluralistic traditions of coexistence. As newspapers of the period and other contemporary accounts reveal, Gandhi effectively utilised these principles in the varied struggles he led to promote the cause of freedom, peace, communal harmony and social justice. Based on his initial experiments and campaigns, Gandhi developed his own unique vision and a plan of action that was based on his understanding of the complexity that defined colonial India and his concern for its many underprivileged. At the present juncture, this very same Gandhian legacy appears turned upside down by the politics of divisiveness. Paromita Goswami (2009), says, Mahatma Gandhi - one of the most prolific writers amongst the figures of world history - has left us details of his growth as a thinker and activist. The Story of Satyagraha writings that see conflict resolution techniques as potentially being about in South Africa‘ documents the struggle of Gandhi, still in his twenties, who confronts racism in a foreign country and is able to negotiate substantial gains for his community through a long-drawn political struggle involving the new methods of Satyagraha. contend that a conception of citizenship that can be extrapolated from Gandhi, and that persisted as a practice, as well as a political language, instilled in the dynamics of Indian citizenship attributes that played an important role in securing the resilience of Indian unity and its democratic viability. The Gandhian conception of citizenship was developed after independence in conjunction with three other primary concomitant notions of citizenship. The ongoing multifaceted interplay between the four competing conceptions of citizenship, and the tensions and shifting balance of power between them became part of the mechanism that enabled the sustainability of some conflicts within the Indian polity to the detriment of other more threatening divisions. In the effect of this process Indian citizenship has been able to inhibit the tensions that had the potential to break the country apart. Radheshyam Jadhav (2012), holds that ethics is branch of philosophy concerned with actions that are morally permissible and actions that are not. Ethics in media constitutes a normative science of conduct applied voluntarily. Satyagrahi model of journalistic ethics could help to establish the lost credibility of journalism and journalists and could pave the way for development communication for the development of deprived. Throughout his life mission Gandhi treated newspaper and journalism as a responsibility and not mere communication or profit making business. Reader‘s voice mattered most for Gandhi. Indian Opinion and all his newspapers were tools of communication for change and for development of deprived masses who struggled against the structures of oppression. Truth, accuracy, objectivity, fairness, balance and impartiality are the basic premise of Satyagrahi journalistic ethics. Gandhi‘s self-restrain mantra is relevant in today‘s journalism when media ethics debate revolves round the infotainment media, stereotypes, depiction of violence, sex, vulgarity, privacy, right to reply, communal writing, sensational and yellow journalism, freebies and sting operations. Gandhi was of the opinion that newspaper should not be used as means of earning livelihood or profit. Satyagrahi journalism stands for popular participatory process of sustainable social- spiritual- material advancement for emancipation and empowerment. Satyagraha was weapon to the deprived masses and Satyagrahi journalism an alternative model of development communication. Selfishness, anger, lack of faith, or impatience have no room while infinite patience, firm resolve, single mindedness of purpose, perfect calm are essential qualities for Satyagrahi journalist. He emphasised the role of spirituality in the development and communication process. People‘s communication and mediums could re-energize Gandhian Satyagrahi journalism. Karen L Harris (2013), over a century since Gandhi‘s historic and personally decisive sojourn in hagiography‖ are still said to ―continue to churn out massive volumes in present-day India‖. Indeed, this commemorative issue of the Journal of Natal and Zulu History is testimony to this legacy and ongoing fascination, and in particular commemorates a centenary of his global bequest of satyagraha (passive resistance) launched in southern Africa. While much of the literature produced on Gandhi continues to adhere to what Dilip Menon has called the ―straight and narrow‖ or what Tanika Sarkar refers to as ―icon making‖, with a persistent veneration of the Mahatma, others have ventured to question, probe, reappraise and reassess a range of dimensions of the Gandhian epoch. One aspect that has increasingly come under scrutiny is Gandhi's relations with other non-Indian communities, particularly as regards his time in South Africa and the emergence of satyagraha. These ties in with a wider concern about the possible contradictions in his professed rejection of racism and his claim to universalism. It is in this context that his apparent failure to ally with any other ethnic grouping within South Africa is questioned. And it is to this aspect of the satyagraha movement that this article turns, with particular reference to Chinese resistance at the turn of the century. Naorem Nandaraj Singh (2014), One of the fundamental concerns of M.K. Gandhi (Mahatma Gandhi) was that of the question of morality. Gandhiji understood man as basically spiritual being, and so a moral being. As such he was mostly concerned with the moral development of each and every individual. In fact, each and every aspect of his philosophical ideas like, Satyagraha, religion, prohibition, human nature, khadi, Swadeshi, constructive progrmmes, etc. in one way or the other shows his endeavour to give a moral basis for human existence and promotes morality of man. The present paper is an attempt to throw some light of his ideas or understanding of morality, and how it is related to his philosophical ideas and moreover examines their relevance in the modern time.

themselves peacefully to beating and torture by their British rulers while simultaneously not hating their opponents or the people who were responsible for such actions – the British government. The millions of people who joined him and paralyzed the British came from all walks of life. Irrespective of religion, caste and creed, being rich or poor, everyone loved him and willingly followed him for the maximum sacrifices. This was a remarkable phenomenon; it was indeed a miracle happening in the world. He was able to change the heart and will of the British Empire and succeeded in freeing India in 1947. There is no such example in the history of mankind like Mahatma Gandhi who pioneered a non-violence movement, mobilized millions, and raised the conscience of the oppressors (British government and Empire) to free India. Martin Luther King Jr., who was inspired by his teachings to lead the American Civil Rights movement, is also a great success story. He was one of a kind, original, creative and a follower of truth. He loved the oppressors and he hated none in his struggle against injustice and sufferings and in his fight for freedom. His peaceful defiance of British rule in India, and his Civil Rights movement in South Africa (1893-1914) were his great places to practice and master nonviolence ways. He challenged British arrogance and in resisting injustice, he harbored no hatred in his heart and was in fact ready to help his opponents when they were in distress. To understand his brilliant work for mankind would take many books and still we may not be able to fathom that such man truly did live in the twentieth century in India. He inspired people through his practice of sufferings and simple living. He was an inspiring moral force. He appealed and touched the hearts of the people – appealed to the conscience of man and therefore his influence was universal. It is a million dollar question of how he did it – a fragile, and meek looking person indeed performed something miraculous. We need to look into his life. He said that my life is my message. This would help to understand his pioneering ways of each and every action. The story of his miracle is also a story of his life. He was above creed, caste or race. He was a true human being and who believed and practiced universal brotherhood.

We can try to understand the significance and impact on the masses of Gandhi‘s innovative idea of starting a Salt March as part of his ultimate journey to succeed in the freedom of India from the foreign rule. It is important to know why he was against foreign rule. At the age of 19, on September 4, 1889, Gandhi went to University College London to train as barrister. He was appalled to see the economic differences in standard of living between Indians and he emerged as Mahatma when he was in South Africa fighting for their cause in a nonviolent way. The Indian Congress Party made the proclamation of the Declaration of Independence of India on January 26, 1930. However, India won independence from the British rule on August 15, 1947. After the Declaration of Independence, Gandhi started developing a clear vision of how to achieve independence of India. He did lots of thinking and soul searching. He was in search of an idea that can be transformed into a mass movement. He was at an impasse. He was in search of an issue that involved the masses and at the same time defied British laws in protest. He came up with a brilliant idea to develop a mass non-violent movement against British Salt tax. He listened to his inner voice. This was the way he used to create innovative ways to resist British laws and ignite the people to join his unique non-violence movement and become an expression of the will of the general community. The British Salt tax was such a unique idea that affected every one. British generated salt tax revenue to support their rule. The private sale and production of salt was a criminal offence punishable by law. However, salt was easily available in coastal zones of India. Laborers could easily produce it freely but they were forced to pay for it. This salt issue also met his criteria of that the movement must involve everyone irrespective of religion, or any other differences – it must involve masses and ignite them throughout India. On March 2, 1930 Gandhi wrote a remarkable letter to Lord Irwin, the Viceroy of India. He wrote, ―Dear Friend, I cannot intentionally hurt anything that lives, much less fellow human beings, even though they may do the greatest wrong to me and mine. Whilst, therefore, I hold the British rule to be a curse, I do not intend to harm to a single Englishman or to any legitimate interest he may have in India…‖ He went on to inform Irwin, he intended to break the salt laws, a gesture that no doubt must have struck Irwin as bizarre. He further said in the same letter, ―If my letter makes no appeal to your heart, on the eleventh day of this month I shall proceed with such co-workers of the Ashram as I can take, to disregard the provisions of the Salt Laws. I regard this to be the most iniquitous of all from the poor man‘s standpoint. As the Independence movement is essentially for the poorest in the land, the beginning will be with this evil.‖ The Viceroy, as expected wrote back to express his regret that Gandhi was again ―contemplating a course of action which is clearly bound to involve violation of the law and danger to public peace.‖ As he promised, on March 12, 1930, Gandhi of 61 years and approximately 78 other journey lasted 23 days. Virtually every resident of each city along this journey watched the great procession. The procession itself grew to about two miles long. He defied the law by making salt. To enforce the law of the land, the British had to arrest the satyagrahis (soldiers of civil disobedience), but the Indians courted arrest in millions.

Satyagraha. loosely translated as ―insistence on truth‖ (satya ―truth‖; agraha ―insistence‖) or holding onto truth or truth force, is a particular philosophy and practice within the broader overall category generally known as nonviolent resistance or civil resistance. The term satyagraha was coined and developed by Mahatma Gandhiji. He deployed satyagraha in the Indian independence movement and also during his earlier struggles in South Africa for Indian rights. Satyagraha theory influenced Nelson Mandela's struggle in South Africa under apartheid, Martin Luther King, Junior's and James Bevel‘s campaigns during the civil rights movement in the United States, and many other social justice and similar movements. Someone who practices satyagraha is a satyagrahi. The term originated in a competition in the news-sheet Indian Opinion in South Africa in 1906. It was an adaptation by Gandhiji of one of the entries in that competition. ―Satyagraha‖ is a compound of the Sanskrit words satya (meaning ―truth‖) and Agraha (―polite insistence", or ―holding firmly to‖). Satya is derived from the word ―sat‖, which means ―being‖. Nothing is or exists in reality except Truth. In the context of satyagraha, Truth therefore includes, a) Truth in speech, as opposed to falsehood, b) what is real, as opposed to nonexistent (asat) and c) good as opposed to evil, or bad. This was critical to Gandhiji‘s understanding of and faith in nonviolence:‖ The world rests upon the bedrock of satya or truth. Asatya, meaning untruth, also means nonexistent, and satya or truth also means that which is. If untruth does not so much as exist, its victory is out of the question. And truth being that which is, can never be destroyed. This is the doctrine of satyagraha in a nutshell.‖ For Gandhiji, satyagraha went far beyond mere "passive resistance" and became strength in practising non-violent methods. In his words: Gandhiji distinguished between satyagraha and passive resistance in the following letter: ―I have drawn the distinction between passive resistance as understood and practiced in the West and satyagraha before I had evolved the doctrine of the latter to its full logical and spiritual extent. I often used ‗passive resistance' and ―satyagraha‖ as resistance has admitted of violence as in the case of the suffragettes and has been universally acknowledged to be a weapon of the weak. Moreover, passive resistance does not necessarily involve complete adherence to truth under every circumstance. Therefore, it is different from satyagraha in three essentials: Satyagraha is a weapon of the strong; it admits of no violence under any circumstance whatsoever; and it ever insists upon truth. I think I have now made the distinction perfectly clear."

It is important to note the intrinsic connection between ahimsa and satyagraha. Satyragraha is sometimes used to refer to the whole principle of nonviolence, where it is essentially the same as ahimsa, and sometimes used in a ―marked‖ meaning to refer specifically to direct action that is largely obstructive, for example in the form of civil disobedience. Gandhiji says; ―It is perhaps clear from the foregoing, that without ahimsa it is not possible to seek and find Truth. Ahimsa and Truth are so intertwined that is is practically impossible to disentangle and separate them. They are like the two sides of a coin, or rather of a smooth unstamped metallic disk. Nevertheless, ahimsa is the means; Truth is the end. Means to be means must always be within our reach, and so ahimsa is our supreme duty.‖

Appraising the extent to which Gandhiji‘s ideas of satyagraha were or were not successful in the Indian independence struggle is a complex task. Judith Brown has suggested that ―this is a political strategy and technique which, for its outcomes, depends of historical specificities.‖ The view taken by Gandhiji differs from the idea that the goal in any conflict is necessarily to defeat the opponent or frustrate the opponent‘s objectives, or to meet one‘s own objectives despite the efforts of the opponent to obstruct these. In satyagraha, by contrast, ―The Satyagrahi‘s object is to convert, not to coerce, the wrong-doer.‖14 The opponent must be converted, at least as far as to stop obstructing the just end, for this cooperation to take place. There are cases, to be sure, when an opponent, e.g. a dictator, has to be unseated and one cannot wait to convert him. The satyagrahi would count this a partial success.

be used in acute political struggle, but as a universal solvent for injustice and harm. He felt that it was equally applicable to large-scale political struggle and to one-on-one interpersonal conflicts and that, it should be taught to everyone. He founded the Sabarmati Ashram to teach satyagraha. He asked satyagrahis to follow the following principles (described in Yoga Sutra): 1. Nonviolence (ahimsa) 2. Truth includes honesty, but goes beyond it to mean living fully in accord with and in devotion to that which is true 3. Non-stealing 4. Chastity (brahmacharya) includes sexual chastity, but also the subordination of other sensual desires to the primary devotion to truth 5. Non-possession (not the same as poverty) 6. Body-labor or bread-labor 7. Control of the palate 8. Fearlessness 9. Equal respect for all religions 10. Economic strategy such as boycotts (swadeshi) 11. Freedom from untouchability.

Mahatma Gandhi was the primary leader of Indian Freedom Movement a pioneer of Satyagraha, or resistance through mass non-violent civil disobedience, Satyagraha is a particular philosophy and practice within the broader overall category generally known as nonviolent resistance or civil resistance. Gandhiji described Satyagrah as the weapon of the strong, it admits of no violence under any circumstances whatsoever, and it ever insists upon truth. Satyagraha remained one of the most potent philosophies in freedom struggles throughout the world today. According to Gandhiji, there was scope for inclusion of violence in the methodology of passive resistance, no matter how remote. Secondly, passivity may also come to imply being weak, being unable to steadfastly and resolutely resist the might of the oppressor. Hence, it may connote a helpless or even It perceived nonviolence as a force greater than violence, and hence capable of fighting it effectively, and ultimately unarming it. Patient suffering was its driving force; one lets the oppressors use as much force and oppression as they can on the nonviolent protestors, until a stage came when they can incur no more violence or oppression. Their capacity to be violent would exhaust, but the capacity of the protestors to endure it non-violently would not. Such valiant endurance and resistance, by no means, amounts to cowardice.

1. B. Chandra and others, ‗India‘s struggle for independence‘, Penguin Books, Delhi, pp. 185- 86. 2. Bhana, Surendra; Vahed, Goolam H. (2005). The Making of a Political Reformer: Gandhi in South Africa, 1893-1914. Manohar Publications, New Delhi. 3. D Narasimha Reddy; A Amarender Reddy; M C S Bantilan (2014). The Impact of Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) on Rural Labor Markets and Agriculture, India Review; Vol. 13 No.3, pp. 251-73. 4. Dennis J (2006). "The Amritsar Massacre of 1919: Gandhi, the Raj and the Growth of Indian Nationalism, pp. 1915–39," in Judd, Empire: The British Imperial Experience from 1765 to the Present pp. 258-272. 5. Gandhi, M. K.; Fischer, Louis (2002). Louis Fischer, ed. The Essential Gandhi: An Anthology of His Writings on His Life, Work and Ideas. Vintage Publishers, New York. 6. Gandhi, Rajmohan (2006). Gandhi: The Man, His People, and the Empire, University of California Press. California. 7. Gandhi, Rajmohan (2006). Gandhi: The Man, His People, and the Empire, University of California Press. California. 8. Gandhi, Tushar A. (2007). "Let's Kill Gandhi I": A Chronicle of His Last Days, the Conspiracy, Murder, Investigation, and Trial., Rupa & Company, New Delhi. 9. Johnson, Richard L. (2006). Gandhi's Experiments With Truth: Essential Writings By And About Mahatma Gandhi, Lexington Books, New York. Vol.31 No.2, pp. 69-75. 11. Lawrence James R. (2000). The Making and Unmaking of British India. pp. 439–518. 12. Louis Fischer: The life of Mahatma Gandhi, Harper and Brothers, New York, pp. 269-71. 13. M. P. Mathai (1999). ―What Swaraj meant to Gandhi‖ International workshop on Non-violent Struggles in the Twentieth Century and their Lessons for the Twenty-first, October, 1999, New Delhi, pp. 1-5. 14. Makrand Mehta (2005). Gandhi and Ahmedabad, 1915-20, Economic and Political Weekly; Vol.40 No.4, Jan, 28-2005, pp. 291-299. 15. Naorem Nandaraj Singh (2014). Morality: Gandhiji's View and its Relevance in the Modern Times, Source International Journal of Humanities and Social Studies; Vol.2 No.1, pp. 75-80 16. Paromita Goswami (2011). A re-reading of Gandhi's Satyagraha in South Africa for Contemporary Community Organizing, Community Development Journal; Vol.44 No.3, July, 2009, pp. 393-402 Ornit Shani, Gandhi, Citizenship and the Resilience of Indian Nationhood, Citizenship Studies; Vol.15 No.6-7, pp. 659-678. 17. Rajni Kothari (1993). ―Masses Classes and the state‖ in New Social Movements in the South, Empowering the people, ed. Ponna Wignaraja, Visataar Publications, New Delhi, p. 61. 18. Thomas Weber (2001). Gandhian Philosophy, Conflict Resolution Theory and Practical Approaches to Negotiation, Journal of Peace Research; Vol.38 No.4, pp. 493-513. 19. Todd, Anne M. (2012). Mohandas Gandhi, InfoBase Publishing, New York. 20. Yasmin Khan (2007). ―The Great Partition: The Making of India and Pakistan.‖ Yale University Press. p. 18.

Research Scholar of Calorx Teachers' University, Ahmedabad, Gujarat