Friday, 12 March 2021

Gandhi and the Modern Gurus

 

Q - Why is Gandhiji less popular than Corporate gurus - Jaggi Vasudeva ji and Sri Sri Ravishankar ji?

Comments

  • Purvi Vyas
    I don't know.. But there is a rising trend among the young people to claim that they don't like.. To assert in fact that they hate him.. 🙁 when asked why?? They don't have answer..
    2
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
  • Rama Subramanian
    1 He doesn't own a television channel; 2 he doesn't have PR agents; 3 he wouldn't care much for popularity without purpose and 4 corollary to 3 above, he wouldn't think your question is valid in the first place
    3
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      Maybe there is more to it. Even if he had all these, he would be ignored today.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Rama Subramanian
      You are wrong 
      Aparna Krishnan
      , once someone told me there are 200 books on him released each year, maybe most of them abusive, but he can't be ignored... I also did this experiment of comparing how many times he is cited as against popular thinkers of East and West of the last century and found him to be twice as much cited more than the nearest next thinker... His popularity is not aggregated fit anything, because it needs not be
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      Maybe you are right. His brutal honesty and his directing the questions at oneself as much as at others can be shied away from, but not ignored.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
  • Velmurugan Balasubramanian
    I think ur question is wrong. Gandhi is not less popular.
    2
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
  • Vinod Mall
    We need entertainment that is why 
    Aparna Krishnan
    .
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
  • Altab Hossain
    Marketing.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      No. Its what he means, and the path he offers. Versus what they mean and the path they offer.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
  • Shashi Enarth
    Dont even go there Aparna. The next thing, you will have folks comparing them with ludicrous arguments. Do you really feel anxious about Gandhiji's popularity?
    2
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
  • Suraj Kumar
    What Gandhi teaches is a philosophy - complex to understand. Only the intellectually advanced can grasp it. Whereas what Jaggi and Sri sri teach are simple techniques to fulfill people's desires. Through giving (fulfilling desires) they gain followership. Whereas what Gandhi does is ASK (ask people to renounce).
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      It is not complex at all - it is very simple 🙂. But yes, it needs giving up for the greater good of all !
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Vinod Mall
      Gandhi complex to understand? are u serious? Peace, brotherhood, non violence, swadeshi... all so easy to understand and practice. That is why Gandhi led the nation and these self proclaimed saints have to use money to build up following
      2
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      Ordinary people, in masses followed Gandhiji - the philosophy was difficult for the OverEducated maybe !!
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Suraj Kumar
      Look at it this way, people's desires is one set - and what a leader offers is another set. The more the overlap, the more the followership. Gandhi's message was apt at a time when India was occupied. Therefore there was followership back then, whereas now, the colonization has become global - so much so that we can simply say we are living in the dark ages. What people desire today are not what Gandhi offers. That set (of people's desires) has changed.
      What sri sri and jaggi and other spiritual leaders offer works even in these harsh times. Hence the followership.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      The enemy was Outside then. Now the enemy is Indide each of us. Gandhi is relevent today, more than ever.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      His procedure, of sacrifice over indulgence, is harder. But actually simple people absorb it easily, because our religious stories that they are rooted in have the same message.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
      • Edited
    • Aparna Krishnan
      Gandhi drew his understanding from the common people of this country. And that is his strength which will last forever on this land. And all lands.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
  • Ramanan Jagannathan
    i am sure Gandhi would have packaged himself differently to suit todays world.
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 5y
    • Vinod Mall
      That's utterly hypothetical. He was the first leader to lead simple life, therefore leader in true sense. I true leader does not need facade but has substance.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
    • Ramanan Jagannathan
      Gandhi's change in attire helped the people of the day identify themselves with him. (Note i have nothing against Gandhi and so dont take this statement that way ). There are lot of aspects of Gandhi that are relevant today and has to be considered by people. having said that, focusing only on the simplicity part and missing out on other aspects of any Guru is missing the forest for the absence of a tree.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 5y
  • Rajesh Pandey
    When Gandhiji was alive, his following was much bigger than the current following of Sadhguru and Sri Sri. So, I agree with the answer given by Aditi Jayakar Kane ji.
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 4y
    • Ramanan Jagannathan
      Lot of people looked upon Gandhi as their leader, but compared to that , fewer people looked up to Gandhi as a spiritual guru and that shows in what we see today.
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
  • Rajesh Pandey
    We may disagree with some or all aspects of life or teachings of Sadhguru / Sri Sri, but the fact remains that if they were mere Yoga teachers, so many people wouldn't have been their followers. They have healed lives across continents and provided practical solutions to real problems of people. They may not have been able to impress many, but that does not mean that their crores of followers are non existent.
    2
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 4y
    • Edited
    • Ramanan Jagannathan
      the problem as i see it is that a particular aspect of Gandhi is taken ( in this case simplicity of life style ) and that is used as the yard stick to measure all outcomes and that is where i tend to disagree with people
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
    • Ramanan Jagannathan
      this approach also alienates people and these are the same people that we want to take along with us. that is why i say that tweaking the approach to suit peoples welfare is never wrong and we have to accept that there are many paths to achieve the same result
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      please take every aspect of gandhi, and see where they score ! 🙂
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
  • Rajesh Pandey
    Aparna Krishnan, your comparison is flawed. If you compare Gandhi ji with Vivekananda or Paramhansa Yogananda, then you can rightly compare how much following each enjoys after the teacher is long gone.
    1
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 4y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      🙂. This was partly loud thinking, and partly rhetorical.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
    • Aparna Krishnan
      And partly triggered by a nagging question as to why our and the next generation is unable to draw on the heritage he left for us.
      1
      • Like
      • Reply
      • 4y
  • Rajesh Pandey
    The people have to deserve a leader. The last generation partly deserved Gandhiji. Present generation doesn't deserve him. Q.E.D. 🙂
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)