Gandhi-logo

Some men changed their times...
One man changed the World for all times!

Comprehensive Website on the life and works of

Mahatma Gandhi

+91-23872061
+91-9022483828
info@mkgandhi.org

  1. Home
  2. Articles
  3. Gandhi's views
  4. Gandhi’s perspectives on Jews and their Homeland

Gandhi’s perspectives on Jews and their Homeland

- By Naseeb Benjamin*

Abstract

Some Jews were Gandhi’s dearest friends. He appreciated many of their qualities. They made a great contribution to the world civilization. He was aware of their sufferings in the past when they were even butchered. It was particularly true during the Nazi domination of Europe. He disapproved of it as it was in consonance with his tenet of nonviolence. For all this, they deserved whole-hearted sympathy. But he did not want that their search for a homeland should result in their taking over land where others were inhabited. This has led some authors to think that Gandhi wished to garner support for his dream of a united India, making him cold-shoulder Israel’s creation. In essence, he was a man of nonviolence and believed in peaceful co-existence among all the concerned people.

I. Introduction

Owing to foreign invasions, the Jews left their homeland of Palestine for different countries. The circumstances of their arrival in India are shrouded in mystery with three Jewish communities. The first community is Cochin, the oldest Jewish community in the country. They came as traders or refugees from the siege of Jerusalem 2,000 years ago or more. They were agriculturalists, soldiers and merchants, and a few held high political office under the Hindu Maharaja. The second Jewish community is the Bene Israelis, shipwrecked off the Konkan coast and settled in and around Mumbai. They assimilated into Hindu culture but maintained some Jewish observances. Third, the Baghdadi Jews came to India during the British Raj from Iraq to settle in Bombay, Calcutta, and other port cities. The best-known among them is the Sassoon family of Bombay. There was little interaction among the three Jewish communities: they spoke different languages, observed different traditions, and had different cultures. Even though the Baghdadi Jews lived near the Bene Israel, there was little interaction between them. The Baghdadi Jews partnered with both Indian and European commercial interests. They played a role in the economic colonization of India. They were loyal to the British, and when the British were leaving India, they were unsure of their future. It led to their exodus, which was propelled by Indian independence and the formation of Israel.1 This was true for the other two Jewish communities too.

A reference may be made here to Abraham Barak Salem (1882-1967), a Cochin Jew. He was a lawyer and nationalist, popularly called Jewish Gandhi, a compliment he happily accepted. Black Jews in Cochin were considered children of enslaved people who faced discrimination in the Paradesi Synagogue. White Jews were not permitted to sit on the benches and so went to their own synagogue. He undertook a satyagraha against it, and his sons defiantly sat on the benches in the Pardesi Synagogue. The discrimination was relaxed in 1932 by the White Jews and finally ended in the 1950s.2

Gandhi regretted that the Hindu caste system crept into other communities, including Jews “And so, in a way Christians, Mussalmans, Parsis, Jews and Hindus have all become untouchables to one another.”3 He reiterated, “Untouchability exists between caste and caste and between Hindus and Mohammedans, Christians and Jews. These defects should be removed from our land. We should forget the feeling of high and low and consider that we are all children of God.”4 He thought, “In dealing with the monster of untouchability my own innermost desire is not that the brotherhood of Hindus only may be achieved, but it essentially is that the brotherhood of man - be he Hindu, Mussalman, Christian, Parsi or Jew - may be realized.”5

He said that only those people were his comrades who looked upon the entire people of India as brothers and sisters.6 Notwithstanding their small numbers in India, the Jews have left behind a rich heritage through grand synagogues, prayer halls, schools, cemeteries, museums, stately mansions, and street names.7 Gandhi was operated on for appendicitis on January 12, 1924, in Sassoon Hospital, Poona. While leading the freedom struggle, he was under the medical care of Dr. Abraham Solomon Erulkar, a Jew, who attended him during his several fasts.8

Gandhi first came in contact with the Jews in South Africa. He said, “I think the Jewish religion is a very fine religion, being so closely allied to Christianity in many respects. For example, the Prophets of the Old Testament are all Jews, and Jesus himself was a Jew. I visited the Synagogue at Johannesburg during the Festival of the Passover, and you can almost say I was keeping the Passover with my Jewish friends….. I have, however, attended two or three Jewish services, which I think are very impressive...”9 When Margarete Spiegel wished to leave Judaism to be a Hindu, he retorted, “You do not need to be a Hindu but a true Jewess. If Judaism does not satisfy you, no other faith will give you satisfaction for any length of time.”10 He subsequently added, “Having reverently studied the scriptures of the world, I have no difficulty in perceiving the beauties in all of them. I could no more think of asking a Christian or a Mussalman or a Parsi or a Jew to change his faith than I would think of changing my own.”11

Overall, he was impressed by the Jews in South Africa. “There is no doubt that the living habits of poor Jews are worse than ours. But when money comes into their hands, they can make very good use of it. Instead of hoarding wealth, they put it to appropriate use. In Durban, in Johannesburg or in Cape Town,... the Jews who have made money know how best to spend it; that their houses are very tidy and elegant, and that their standards of life are high. They mix easily with other Europeans and by doing so, they have been able to make so much money that, in Johannesburg, they wield as much influence as the rulers themselves.”12 He noted, “They have got a wonderful spirit of cohesion. That is to say, wherever you find Jews there is a spirit of comradeship among them. Moreover, they are a people with a vision.”13

For some time his food was Jewish. He wrote, “My food at present is 30 ounces goat’s milk with honey and any fruit that is available and generally home-made bread like Jewish passover cake unleavened.”14 Gandhi called himself not merely a Hindu but a Christian, a Muslim, a Jew, a Sikh, a Parsee, a Jain or a man of any other sect. This way, he avoided any clash and expanded his conception of religion.15 He insisted, “I do hold that the God of Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsees, Jews and others is one and the same, no matter by what name a votary mentions Him or recognizes Him.”16 He asserted, “I claim to be a true Hindu and a sanatani Hindu at that. That is exactly why I am also a Muslim, a Parsi, a Christian and a Jew. For me all these are the branches of the same tree.”17 He repeated, “In thought, word and deed I love the Muslims, Parsis and Jews and all mankind as much as I love the Hindus.”18

Gandhi had many Jewish friends in South Africa.19 Herman Kallenbach (1871-1945), a German Jew, was one of them. He loved luxury, but he led an austere life after getting close to Gandhi. He assisted Gandhi in establishing Tolstoy Farm near Johannesburg on May 30, 1910. He was with Gandhi in fasting and dietetic changes. Gandhi lived with him when satyagraha was at its height.20 He introduced Sonja Schlesin (1888-1956) (a Jewish girl, b. Moscow) to Gandhi. She joined him as a steno-typist at the age of 16 and “achieved the conquest of my heart in a month”. She made herself useful for Indian Opinion and ardently supported the Indian cause. She was more of a member of the Gandhi family. He wrote, “Thousands of stalwart Indians looked up to her for guidance. When during the satyagraha days almost everyone was in jail, she led the movement single-handed.

She had the management of thousands, a tremendous amount of correspondence, and Indian Opinion on her hands, but she never wearied.” Gandhi wrote about her in Indian Opinion dated January 11, 1908, “Very few Indians know how hard she has worked for the community. She works indeed not for a salary, but because of her deep sympathy [for the Indian cause.21 The third was H.J.H. Polak (1882-1959), an English Jew whose candour attracted Gandhi. They were like blood brothers. He edited Indian Opinion for some time, and Gandhi wished him to be his successor in conducting Indian affairs in his absence. He was Gandhi’s close colleague in passive resistance. He was sentenced to imprisonment for three months for advocating the Indian cause. Gandhi wrote that the Indian community in South Africa owed “not a little” to Mrs. Millie Polak (a Christian), who shared her husband’s self-sacrifice and public spirit. She wrote that Gandhi was a loving and understanding older brother. The Polaks, Gandhi, and Ba lived in one home despite rampant racism.22

II. Role of Jews in India

Gandhi’s fraternity for different Indian communities goes back to his struggles in South Africa. During a protest march to Transvaal, “Everyone realized that we are all brothers whether we are ourselves Christians, Jews, Hindus, Mussalmans or anything else.”23 Interestingly enough, “The first satyagrahis of South Africa laboured for the common good and the common purse and felt free like birds. They included Hindus, Muslims (Shias and Sunnis), Christians (Protestants and Roman Catholics), Parsis, and Jews.”24 He recalled, “...my experience with all of them warrants the statement that I have known no distinction between relatives and strangers, countrymen and foreigners, white and coloured, Hindus and Indians of other faiths, whether Mussalmans, Parsis, Christians or Jews.”25

Gandhi believed that though migrants in India, the Jews had rights and duties like other Indians. The foremost national goal was Swaraj which had many connotations for him. Among others, “Swaraj means that Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians and Jews should all be able to follow their own faith and should respect those of others.”26 He wrote that the four pillars of swaraj were nonviolence, Hindu-Muslim-Sikh-Parsi-Christian-Jew unity, total removal of untouchability and manufacture of hand-spun and hand-woven khaddar completely displacing foreign cloth.27 His advice was: “Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis and Jews must all remain together and live together in Peace and brotherliness. We must give up drink and gambling and we must all, in due humility, worship God according to our own ways and early in the morning, after having washed our mouth, cleaned our teeth and having regained perfect possession of our faculties, we must announce the name of God and ask Him to help us to be and remain good. We must ask Him to help us to do our duty by our country.”28 Again, “No great preparation save a mental revolution is necessary for us - Hindus, Mussalmans, Parsis, Sikhs, Christians and Jews and others - to feel as one indivisible nation and as having a common stake in the country...”29 He believed: “God is not seated in the skies, in the heavens, or elsewhere. He is enshrined in the heart of everyone - be he a Hindu, Mohammedan, Christian or Jew, man or woman.”30 He admitted, “I am a servant of Mussalmans, Christians, Parsis and Jews as I am of Hindus. And a servant is in need of love, not prestige. That is assured to me so long as I remained a faithful servant.”31 Therefore, “I wish to become and die as a true servant of the Hindus and, therefore, of the Harijans, of India and, therefore, of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians, Jews and all others.”32

Again, “Mussalmans, Christians, Jews and Parsis, among whom I have friends as dear as blood-brothers?”33 He stressed, “In the unity of all parties in India, I always refer to and include Anglo-Indians, Parsis, Jews, and so forth; without these there could be no unity, except the tyranny of the great over the small. The greater communities of India, such as the Hindus and Muslims, had solemn obligations to perform towards the lesser communities.”34

He also focused on swadeshi. He pleaded, “I beseech every Hindu, Mussulman, Sikh, Parsi, Christian and Jew, who believes that he belongs to this country, to take the swadeshi vow and to ask others also to do likewise.”35 After some days, he reiterated, “I hope that Hindus, Mahomedans, Sikhs, Parsees, Christians, Jews and all who are born in India or who have made India their land of adoption will fully participate in these national observances and I hope, too, that women will take therein as full a share as men.”36 With swadeshi went spinning and the boycott of foreign cloth. He wrote, “Every man and woman and child in India, Hindu or Muslim, Parsi or Christian, Sikh or Jew, rich or poor, who wants to join God’s army, must qualify himself or herself by half an hour’s drill on the spinning wheel.”37 He clarified, “… if we are to clothe ourselves by the joint effort of millions, the politician, the poet, the potentate, the pundit and the pauper, male or female, Hindu or Mussalman, Christian, Parsi or Jew, will have religiously to give half an hour to spinning for the sake of the country…. The religion of Indian humanity demands half an hour’s spinning at least from everyone who calls himself or herself Indian.38 He said, “For if we, Hindus, Mussalmans, Sikhs, Christians, Parsis and Jews unite in achieving the universalization of the wheel in India, we shall not only have arrived at real unity and exclusion of foreign cloth, but we shall also have acquired self-confidence and organizing ability which render violence wholly unnecessary for regaining our freedom.”39 Hindus, Mussalmans, Christians, Parsis, Jews, and others had their place in the All-India Spinners’ Association.40

At the same time, “Untouchability of foreign cloth must be held to be a duty with every Hindu, Mussulman, Jain, Sikh, Parsi, Christain, Jew and all other religious communities which have made India their home…. Untouchability of foreign cloth is as much a virtue with all of us as untouchability of the suppressed classes must be a sin with every devout Hindu.”41 He invited volunteers for satyagraha work, “I have already stated that everyone is eligible for enlistment in this army (of satyagrahis), men and women, the young and the old, the cripple and the disabled, the weak and the strong, Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Christians, Jews, Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Dheds and Bhangis.”42

It could be a small beginning, but the overall effects could be widespread. He wrote, “If one district can be found where ninety per cent of the population have completely boycotted foreign cloth and are manufacturing all the cloth required by them by hand-spinning and hand-weaving, if the whole of the population of that district, whether Hindu, Mussulman, Parsi, Sikh, Christian or Jewish, is living in perfect amity, if the whole of its Hindu population is purged of the sin of untouchability and if at least one in every ten of its inhabitants is capable of suffering imprisonment or even mounting the gallows, and if while that district is civilly, peacefully and honourably resisting the Government, the rest of India remains non-violent and united and prosecutes the programme of swadeshi, I hold it to be perfectly possible to establish swaraj during this year.”43 Even after the Government of India confined him to Bombay city, he said, “I shall never abandon the faith I have that India is capable of delivering this truth to the whole world, and I wish that all Indians, men and women, whether they are Hindus or Mahomedans, Parsis, Christians or Jews will share with me this unquenchable faith (in satyagraha).”44 He wrote, “Would to God that all of us, Hindus, Mohmmedans, Christians, Parsis, Jews, belonging to all races, have the same virtue of charity, justness and breadth of vision.”45 After a while, he wrote, “Lord, lead India towards the path of Truth, this doing teach her the religion of swadeshi, and knit the Hindus, Mussulmans, Parsis, Christians and Jews living in India closer together.”46

When he launched the Non-cooperation Movemen (1919-24), he held it to be “… so pure that no class of people, whether Parsis or Christians or Jews, who have made this country their own, will be able to keep aloof from it.”47 Nevertheless, the Parsis, Christians, and Jews kept aloof from it, resulting in communal disturbances. Distressed, he wrote on November 19, 1921, “I must refuse to eat or drink anything but water till the Hindus and Mussulmans of Bombay have made peace with the Parsis, the Christians and the Jews, and till the non-co-operators have made peace with the co-operators. The swaraj that I have witnessed during the last two days has stunk in my nostrils. Hindu-Muslim unity has been a menace to the handful of Parsis, Christians and Jews. The nonviolence of the non-co-operators has been worse than the violence of co-operators. For with nonviolence on our lips we have terrorized those who have differed from us and in so doing we have denied our God.”48 When peace was restored, he issued a statement: “I will beseech the Parsis, the Christians and the Jews to bear in mind the new awakening in India. They will see many coloured waters in the ocean of Hindu and Mussulman humanity.

They will see dirty waters on the shore. I would ask them to bear with their Hindu or Mussulman neighbours who may misbehave with them and immediately report to the Hindu and Mussulman leaders through their own leaders with a view to getting justice.”49 His conviction was: “It behoves us all to forgive and forget the errors of one another. Hindus, Mussulmans, Parsis, Christians and Jews, who have their homes in India, ought to live as brothers and sisters and bear with the differences and failings of one another.”50 Again, “Hindu-Muslim unity must be our creed to last for all time and under all circumstances. Nor must that unity be a menace to the minorities, the Parsis, the Christians, the Jews or the powerful Sikhs.”51 His expectation included “The promotion of unity amongst Hindus, Mussulmans, Christians, Parsees, Jews etc.”52

He insisted, “There must be a heart union between Hindus, Mussulmans, Parsis, Christians and Jews. The three latter communities may and will distrust the other two. The recent occurrences must strengthen that distrust. We must go out of our way to conquer their distrust. We must not molest them if they do not become full non-cooperators or do not adopt swadeshi or the white khadi cap which has become its symbol. We must not be irritated against them even if they side with the Government on every occasion. We have to make them ours by right of loving service.”53 He continued, “Hindu-Muslim unity is not worth a day’s purchase if it does not prefer the interests of smaller communities to its own. Christians and Jews in India are not foreigners, nor are Parsis. We must go out of our way to be friendly to them and to serve and help them, above all to protect them from harm from ourselves.”54 Obviously then, “Unless therefore we remove the last trace of ill will against Parsis, Christians or Jews, we shall fail in our purpose. The condition of such protection is not that minorities accept our political or other opinion. That would be no protection.

Protection to be true has to be given in spite of the dissent, even opposition of minorities. Indeed we must jealously guard the rights of minorities if we are to have perfect freedom of opinion in the country.”55 He said, “In the moment of our trial and our triumph let me declare my faith, I believe in loving my enemies. I believe in nonviolence as the only remedy open to the Hindus, Mussulmans, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians and Jews of India. I believe in the power of suffering to melt the stoniest heart. The brunt of the battle must fall on the first three. The last named three are afraid of the combination of the first three. We must by our honest conduct demonstrate to them that they are our kinsmen.”56 He admitted, “If, at the end of the year, the people have not realized through their own experience that swaraj will be won through nonviolence, through unity of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Parsis, Christians and Jews through swadeshi and the removal of untouchability, then I shall have been proved totally deficient in practical wisdom and I must retire to the Himalayas.”57

He argued that, inter alia, those who did not recognize the need for unity of the Hindus, the Muslims, the Sikhs, the Parsis, the Christians, and the Jews, should not even think of courting arrest and should decidedly abandon the idea of getting their names enrolled as volunteers.58 He repeated, among other things, “We must behave with consideration and love towards our Parsi, Jew and Christian brothers and also those who co-operate with the Government.”59 He argued, “But the best method of strengthening it (Hindu-Muslim unity) is for both Hindus and Muslims to take it upon themselves to protect the minority communities. They should love and respect Parsis, Christians and Jews, protect them and never so much as dream of harassing them or forcing them to do anything.”60 He reiterated, “If Hindu-Muslim unity means enmity towards Parsis, Christians or Jews, that unity will be a curse for the world.”61 He warned that those who did not believe in the brotherhood of Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Christians, and Jews should leave the Gujarat Mahavidyalaya.62

Nor did he forget the Jews during the Salt Satyagraha (1930-31) and prophesied that if it kept the earmarked path, Jews and others would join it.63 Subsequently, he observed, “Those who say that Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Jews and others have not united speak an untruth. This salt tax applies equally to all…. Why should not everyone unite in order to have that tax abolished from which even a buffalo and a cow cannot escape?”64 He clarified, “I have never dreamt that I could win swaraj merely through my effort or assisted only by the Hindus. I stand in need of the assistance of Mussalmans, Parsis, Christians, Sikhs, Jews and all other Indians.”65 He added, “Purna – complete - (Swaraj) because it is as much for the prince as for the peasant, as much for the rich landowner as for the landless tiller of the soil, as much for the Hindus as for the Mussalmans, as much for the Parsis and Christians as for the Jains, Jews and Sikhs, irrespective of any distinction of caste or creed or status in life. The very connotation of the word and the means of its attainment to which we are pledged - truth and nonviolence - preclude all possibility of that swaraj being more for someone than for the other, being partial to someone and prejudicial to the other.”66

He treated the Indian National Congress as the epitome of the freedom struggle. “If the Congress is our national assembly, if the Congress is an instrument in our hands for establishing swaraj in India, it is natural that every man and woman, every Hindu and Mussulman, Christian, Parsi and Jew born in India should place themselves on the Congress register.”67 He expressed similar sentiments later also.68

When Tilak Swaraj Fund was established, money had to be collected from all and sundry. He stressed, “Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Christians, Jews—all who look upon themselves as Indians should contribute their full share”.69 He hoped that Hindus, Muslims, Parsis, Sikhs, Christians, and Jews would observe the oath of swadeshi they had taken. Tilak had taught them that swaraj was their birthright and they would only be doing their duty to their country by winning it. He appealed to them to observe the Swadeshi vow forever and ever. He urged them never to give up swadeshi even after they had attained swaraj.70

He wished constructive work to be done by all the people. He wrote, “Communal unity means unity between Hindus, Sikhs, Mussalmans, Christians, Parsis, Jews. All these go to make Hindustan. He who neglects any of these communities does not know constructive work.”71 He also said, “It will be necessary for us Indians - Hindus, Mohammedans, Christians, Jews, Parsis, and all others to whom India is their home - to recognize a common flag to live and to die for.”72

He wanted the minorities like the Jews to find a place in the interim government.73 In free India, there had to be freedom and protection for all minorities. Parsi fire temples and Jewish synagogues should be protected as Hindu temples.74 Besides, “And what shall we do with the Jews? We must so treat them that they will enjoy perfect freedom here.”75

III. Jewish homeland

He compared the untouchables relegated to remote quarters of a town/village by the Hindus with the Jews in Europe who were like untouchables, and the quarters assigned to them were named ghettoes.

He said, “The ancient Jews regarded themselves as the chosen people of God to the exclusion of all others, with the result that their descendants were visited with a strange and even unjust retribution.”76 He had misgivings about giving Palestine to the Jews to the exclusion of the Arabs. He said succinctly, “So far as I am aware, there never has been any difficulty put in the way of Jews and Christians visiting Palestine and performing all their religious rites. No canon, however, of ethics or war can possibly justify the gift by the Allies of Palestine to Jews.”77 He stressed, “The most thorny part of the question is, therefore, Palestine. Britain has made promises to the Zionists. The latter have, naturally, a sacred sentiment about the place. The Jews, it is contended, must remain a homeless wandering race unless they have obtained possession of Palestine. I do not propose to examine the soundness or otherwise of the doctrine underlying the proposition.

All I contend is that they cannot possess Palestine through a trick or a moral breach. Palestine was not at stake in the War. The British Government could not dare have asked a single Muslim soldier to wrest control of Palestine from fellow Muslims and give it to the Jews.” He continued, “Palestine, as a place of Jewish worship, is a sentiment to be respected and the Jews would have a just cause of complaint against Mussulman idealists if they were to prevent Jews from offering worship as freely as themselves…. Either Zionists must revise their ideal about Palestine, or, if Judaism permits the arbitrament of war, engage in a ‘holy war’ with the Muslims of the world with the Christians throwing in their influence on their side. But one may hope that the trend of world opinion will make ‘holy wars’ impossible and religious questions or differences will tend more and more towards a peaceful adjustment based upon the strictest moral considerations.”78

He argued: “The Muslims claim Palestine as an integral part of Jazirat-ul-Arab (peninsula of Arabs). They are bound to retain its custody, as an injunction of the Prophet. But that does not mean that the Jews and the Christians cannot freely go to Palestine, or even reside there and own property. What non-Muslims cannot do is to acquire sovereign jurisdiction. The Jews cannot receive sovereign rights in a place which has been held for centuries by Muslim powers by right of religious conquest.” He repeated, “The Muslim soldiers did not shed their blood in the late War for the purpose of surrendering Palestine out of Muslim control.”79

He told The Jewish Chronicle he had “great sympathy” for the Jews.

Anti-Semitism was a remnant of barbarism, and antipathy to Jews and their persecution were incomprehensible. However, “Zionism meaning reoccupation of Palestine (by Jews) has no attraction for me. I can understand the longing of a Jew to return to Palestine, and he can do so if he can without the help of bayonets, whether his own or those of Britain. In that event he would go to Palestine peacefully and in perfect friendliness with the Arabs.” His remedy was twofold: Christians should learn toleration and charity, and the Jews should rid themselves of the causes for their reproach.80

He wrote on the Jews vs. the Arabs in Harijan, touching on the Hitlerite genocide. He reiterated, “My sympathies are all with the Jews.” He conceded, “But the German persecution of the Jews seems to have no parallel in history. The tyrants of old never went so mad as Hitler seems to have gone.”81 But he asserted, “If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German may, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. Suffering voluntarily undergone will bring them an inner strength and joy.”

His faith in nonviolence was irrevocable, “I am convinced that if someone with courage and vision can arise among them to lead them in non-violent action, the winter of their despair can in the twinkling of an eye be turned into the summer of hope.” He hoped, “The German Jews will score a lasting victory over the German gentiles in the sense that they will have converted the latter to an appreciation of human dignity.” At the same time he said, “The cry for the national home for the Jews does not make much appeal to me.” They should make that country their home where they were born and earned their livelihood.

Palestine belonged to the Arabs, as England belonged to the English or France to the French. It was wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. The international mandates had no sanction. He believed, “The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred. The Jews born in France are French in precisely the same sense that Christians born in France are French. If the Jews have no home but Palestine, will they relish the idea of being forced to leave the other parts of the world in which they are settled?” They could settle in Palestine only by the goodwill of the Arabs. They should seek to convert the Arab heart, offering satyagraha in front of the Arabs and offering themselves to be shot or thrown into the Dead Sea. He argued, “There are hundreds of ways of reasoning with the Arabs, if they will only discard the help of the British bayonet. As it is, they are co-sharers with the British in despoiling a people who have done no wrong to them. I am not defending the Arab excesses. I wish they had chosen the way of nonviolence in resisting what they rightly regarded as an unwarrantable encroachment upon their country.”82

Gandhi expected sharp reactions against his views. He wrote to his German critics, “The main facts about the atrocities are beyond dispute…. (but) underlying my writing there was friendliness towards Germany, never any ill will.” He amplified, “And if the Jews …adopt active nonviolence, i.e., fellow-feeling for the gentile Germans deliberately … the stoniest German heart will melt. Great as have been the Jewish contributions to the world’s progress, this supreme act of theirs will be their greatest contribution and war will be a thing of the past.”83

When suggested that the Jews adhered to nonviolence for centuries, Gandhi retorted that it was not a deliberate policy. He drew a distinction between passive resistance of the weak and active non-violent resistance of the strong. Sufferings of the nonviolent have been known to melt the stoniest hearts. He wrote, “I make bold to say that if the Jews can summon to their aid the soul power that comes only from nonviolence, Herr Hitler will bow before the courage which he has never yet experienced in any large measure in his dealings with men….” He added, “The most relevant criticism, however, which I have received is this: How do I expect the Jews to accept my prescription when I know that India, where I am myself working, where I call myself the self-appointed general, has not accepted it in toto. My answer is:

‘Blessed are they that expect nothing.’ I belong to the category of the blessed, in this case at least.”84

Gandhi believed that the Jews even wanted America and England to fight Germany on their behalf for their anti-Semitism. He stressed, “… to be truly non-violent, I must love him (the adversary) and pray for him even when he hits me. The Jews have not been actively nonviolent or, in spite of the misdeeds of the dictators, they would say, ‘We shall suffer at their hands…. But we shall suffer not in the manner in which they want us to suffer.’ If even one Jew acted thus, he would salve his self-respect and leave an example which, if it became infectious, would save the whole of Jewry and leave a rich heritage to mankind besides.”85 He did not despair because Hitler’s heart was not touched. “On the contrary I plead for more suffering and still more till the melting has become visible to the naked eye.”86 The Editor of The Jewish Tribune (Bombay) referred to the imputation made against Jews by Gandhi that they urged countries like England and America to go to war against Germany which was false. Gandhi admitted that as “… I cannot lay my hands on anything on the strength of which I made the challenged observation, I must withdraw it without any reservation.”87

Subsequently, he said, “I do believe that the Jews have been cruelly wronged by the world…. But for their heartless persecution, probably no question of return to Palestine would ever have arisen. The world should have been their home, if only for the sake of their distinguished contribution to it.” All the same, “…they have erred grievously in seeking to impose themselves on Palestine with the aid of America and Britain and now with the aid of naked terrorism. Their citizenship of the world should have and would have made them honoured guests of any country.” Gandhi asked, “Why should they depend upon American money or British arms for forcing themselves on an unwelcome land? Why should they resort to terrorism to make good their forcible landing in Palestine? If they were to adopt the matchless weapon of nonviolence whose use their best Prophets have taught…, their case would be the world’s, and I have no doubt that among the many things that the Jews have given to the world, this would be the best and the brightest. It is twice blessed. It will make them happy and rich in the true sense of the word and it will be a soothing balm to the aching world.”88

He again remarked, “If I were a Jew, I would tell them: ‘Don’t be so silly as to resort to terrorism, because you simply damage your own case which otherwise would be a proper case.’ If it is just political hankering then I think there is no value in it. Why should they hanker after Palestine? They are a great race and have great gifts. I have lived with the Jews many years in South Africa. If it is a religious longing then surely terrorism has no place. They should meet the Arabs, make friends with them, and not depend on British aid or American aid or any aid, save what descends from Jehovah.”89

He tried to balance his views between the Jews and Arabs when he said, “The Jews are a persecuted people worthy of world sympathy and India sympathizes with them. They are energetic, intelligent and progressive. The Arabs are a great people with a great history and therefore if they provide refuge for the Jews without the mediation of any nation, it will be in their tradition of generosity.”90 His final suggestion for the most acceptable solution to the Palestine problem was: “The abandonment wholly by the Jews of terrorism and other forms of violence.”91

IV. Concluding remarks

Gandhi came in touch with the Jews during his sojourn in South Africa. Instead of painting their Shylock-like picture, he wrote about them glowingly. He was grieved at the persecution of the Jews in Europe for centuries, especially under the Nazis. When Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to Gandhi about the plight of the Jews, he replied, “And I feel keenly for the persecuted Jews. As a concrete proposal I suggest your collecting the names of the most deserving ones and making it plain to them that they must be prepared to throw in their lot with us and accept our standard of living.”92 Recently, the National Library of Israel obtained his letter dated September 1, 1939 to A.E. Sholet, head of Bombay Zionist Association, Bombay in which he wished the “afflicted (Jewish) people” an “era of peace”. He greeted them with a happy Rosh Hashanah (new year). Sholet’s efforts to win the support of the Indian leadership for the Jews in Palestine failed. Subsequently, he wrote to Eliahu Epstein (who became Israel’s first ambassador to US), “… although Gandhi to a certain extent understood the idealism of the Jews’ wish to return to Palestine, he still saw the Palestine question from the Muslim point of view.”93 Leonard A. Gordon thinks, “Gandhi also believed that the Arabs were the main sufferers in Palestine in the 1930s and 1940s. Based on information that seems likely to have come from Muslim sources, Gandhi condemned British tyranny and Jewish terrorism in Palestine in his statements of 1938, 1946, and 1947.”94 Kallenbach, American pacifist John Haynes Holmes, British Labour MP, Sydney Silverman, Louis Fischer, etc., persuaded Gandhi to support the Zionist cause but in vain.

Subsequent research has suggested the habitation of both Jews and Arabs in Palestine. Benjamin Brown writes, “The Jews have had an uninterrupted presence in the region since antiquity albeit in a minority and hence legitimate claim to some of the land. Therefore reciprocal recognition of the rights of the various religious and ethnic communities is a precondition to the creation of two states whose respective territories will be determined by their demographic minorities.”95 Simone Panter-Brick adds, “Gandhi had reasons of his own for favouring a consensus in Palestine. He had constantly in mind his own struggle to maintain unity in India itself, where his claim to be a spokesman for all Indians, Muslims as well as Hindus, was bitterly contested by Jinnah and his Muslim League.”96 P.R. Kumaraswami has concluded that Gandhi’s views on Jewish nationalism in the 1920s were hostage to the Khilafat Movement; his views in the 1930s were determined by growing Muslim League-Congress ideological warfare. Power politics determined Gandhi’s thoughts on Judaism, not his moralist or ethical stance.97 Thus, Gandhi’s opposition to religious-based claims by the Arabs over Palestine was exclusively directed at Jews and not at the Muslims. As a counterpoise to it, one must remember that Gandhi was against imperialism and could not bear the hegemony of one group of people over another group in any part of the world.

Notes and References

  1. “Bringing India’s Jews to light”. Interview of Jael Silliman by Michelle Caswell of Asia Society.
  2. Bala Menon and Essie Sassoon, The Jewish Gandhi of Cochin – A biography of Abraham Barak Salem (Tamarind Tree Books). Also see Nathan Katz & Ellen S. Goldberg, “Jewish “Apartheid” and a Jewish Gandhi”, Jewish Social Studies, vol. 50, nos. 3/4, pp. 147-76. The Black Jews came about 600 to 500 years before Christ after being in captivity of Nebuchadnezzer of Babylonia till Cyrus of Persia freed them. Hence, they were considered children of slaves. On the other hand, the White Jews arrived at the close of the fifteenth century from Spain, Portugal, etc., owing to repression.
  3. “Speech at public meeting”, Coonoor, 3/2/34. The Hindu, 7/2/34. Collective works of Mahatma Gandhi (hereafter CWMG), vol. LXIII, p. 105. (Here soft copy of CWMG is used obtained from gandhiashramsevagram.org/gandhi-literature/collected-works-ofmahatma-gandhi-volume-1-to-98.php). Volume numbers are in Latin while the page numbers are in Arabic.
  4. “Speech at public meeting”, Pollachi, 7/2/34. The Hindu, 9/2/34. LXIV, 125.
  5. “Speech at public meeting”, Trichinopoly, 10/2/34. Harijan, 16/2/34. LXIII, 145.
  6. “Speech at public meeting”, Sirsi, 28/3/34. Harijan, 9/3/34. Ibid., 237.
  7. See Shalva Weil (ed.), India’s Jewish heritage: Ritual, art, & life cycle (Mumbai:Marg Publications, 2002).
  8. Nissim Moses, “Gandhi was not a Zionist”, The Jerusalem Post, 29/10/19.
  9. Interview to The Jewish Chronicle, London (before October 2, 1931), The Jewish Chronicle, 2/10/1931. LIII, 451.
  10. Letter to Margarete Spiegel, 15/3/34. LXIII, 281.
  11. “About conversion”, Harijan, 28/9/35. LXVIII, 20.
  12. “Our shortcomings”, Indian Opinion (henceforth IO), 20/9/06. V, 221.
  13. Interview to The Jewish Chronicle (London), 2/10/1931. LIII, 452.
  14. Letter to Sonja Schlesin, Sabarmati Ashram, 14/8/27. XXXIX, 399.
  15. “Speech at prayer meeting”, Jagatpur, 10/1/47. Amrita Bazar Patrika, 14/1/47. VIIC, 262.
  16. Letter to S.G.A. Agha, Kazirkhil, 27/1/47. VIIC, 332.
  17. “Speech at a prayer meeting”, New Delhi, 3/9/47. Prarthana Pravachan – I. IVC, 368.
  18. “Note to Manu Gandhi”, Dilhiman Gandhiji - I. IIIC, 170.
  19. Margaret Chatterjee, Gandhi and his Jewish friends (Palgrave Macmillan, 1992).
  20. Refer to Shimon Lev, The story of Mahatma Gandhi and Herman Kallenbach (SAB, 2012).
  21. IO, 11/1/08. VIII, 82. For details see George Paxton, Sonja Schlesin, Gandhi’s South African Secretary (Glasgow: Pax Books, 2006).
  22. “Mr. Polak and his work”, IO, 3/7/9. IX, p. 395. In addition, refer to Prabha Ravi Shanker, “Mahatma Gandhi and the Polaks”, Gandhi Marg, vol. 38, no. 1, April-June 2016. Mkgandhi.org/articles/mahatma-gandhi-and-the-polaks Useful information for the three associates is also found in Gandhi’s Satyagraha in South Africa (1928), XXXIV and An autobiography or the story of my experiments with truth (1927 & 1929) (hereafter Autobiography), VIL.
  23. Satyagraha in South Africa. XXXIV, 246-47.
  24. “Ahimsa in practice”, Harijan, 27/1/40. LXXVII, 245.
  25. Autobiography. VIL, 295-96.
  26. “Definitions of swaraj”, Navajivan (hereafter Nn), 14/8/21. XXIV, 88-89.
  27. “If I am arrested”, Young India (hereafter YI), 9/3/22. XXVI, 325.
  28. “Speech in reply to Congress Sabha address”, Madras, 24/3/25. The Hindu, 25/3/25. XXXI, 45.
  29. “The origin of it”, YI, 23/2/28. XLI, 218.
  30. “Speech to students”, The Hindu, 21/7/27. XXXIX, 258.
  31. “Stoning to death”, YI, 26/3/25. XXXI, 61.
  32. “Warning to me”, Harijanbandhu, 23/4/33. LX, 470.
  33. “Speech at public meeting”, Alleppey. 18/1/34. Harijan, 26/1/34. LXIII, 9.
  34. “Interview to Dr. H.W.B. Moreno”, Santiniketan, 31/5/25. Amrita Bazar Patrika, 2/6/25. XXXI, 422.
  35. “The Swadeshi vow – II.” The Bombay Chronicle (hereafter TBC), 18/4/19. XVII, 400.
  36. “Message to countrymen”, The Hindu, 10/4/19. XVII, 409.
  37. “The half-hour drill”, YI, 25/9/24. XXIX, 199.
  38. “Not man’s work?” YI, 11-6-1925. XXXI, 459-60.
  39. “Comments on a letter”, before 16/6/25. YI, 25/6/25. Ibid., 482.
  40. “Speech at public meeting”, Bhagalpur. The Searchlight, 16/10/25. XXXIII, 44.
  41. “Speech on Swadeshi, Bombay” TBC, 2/8/21. XXIV, 40.
  42. “Eating steel pellets”, Nn, 20/11/21. XXV 133.
  43. “Requisite conditions”, YI, 3/11/21. XXV, 43.
  44. Satyagraha leaflet, no. 6. 25/4/19. XVII, 450.
  45. Letter to the press, Bombay, 6/9/19. TBC, 19/9/19. XIIX, 343.
  46. “Ring out the old, ring in the new” (coming of the new year), YI, 5/11/19. XIX, 81.
  47. “Parsi Rustomjee’s gift”, Nn, 26/12/20. XXII, 138.
  48. “Appeal to Bombay citizens”, YI, 24/11/21. XXV, 129.
  49. “Statement before breaking the fast”, 21/11/21. YI, 24/11/21. XXV, 140.
  50. “Citizens’ appeal”, YI, 24/11/21. XXV, 495.
  51. Letter to Hakim Ajmal Khan, Sabarmati Jail, 12/3/22. XXVI, 355.
  52. Letter to Mrs. Maddock, Andheri, 14/3/24. XXVII, 54.
  53. “To coworkers”, YI, 24, 11, 21. XXV, 142.
  54. “Workers beware”, YI, 24/11/21. XXV, 145.
  55. “Rights of minorities”, YI, 1/12/21. Ibid., 167.
  56. “Love not hate”, YI, 8/12/21. Ibid., 219.
  57. One year’s time-limit”, Nn, 11/12/21. Ibid., 228-29.
  58. “What will Gujarat do?” Nn, 18/12/21. Ibid., 285-86.
  59. “Well done, but will this continue”, Nn, 8/1/22. Ibid, 394.
  60. “Khilafat Conference”, Ibid., 398.
  61. “Where is Swaraj?” Ibid., 482-83.
  62. “Speech at Gujarat Mahavidyalaya”, Ahmedabad, 8/8/24. Nn, 10/8/24. XXVIII, 447.
  63. “What it is not”, YI, 12/3/30. IIL, 413.
  64. “Speech at Borsad,” 18/3/30. Nn, 23/3/30. Ibid., 455.
  65. “Speech at Broach”, 26/3/30. Nn, 30/3/30. Ibid., 477.
  66. “Speech at Sisganj Gurudwara”, Delhi, 26/2/31. YI, 5/3/31. LI,186.
  67. “Speech at Cocanada”, 2/4/21. The Hindu, 6/4/21. XXII, 485.
  68. “To whom does Congress belong?” Hindi Navjivan (henceforth HNn), 19/12/29. IIL, 111; “Communal question”, YI, 9/1/30. 48, 208-9; “Some questions”, YI, 20/2/30. IIL, 330-1; “Speech at public meeting”, Bombay. TBC, 29/12/31. LIV, 320; and “An appropriate question”, Harijan, 9/8/42. LXXXIII, 159-60.
  69. “National Tilak Memorial Fund for Swaraj”, Nn, 20/2/21. XXII, 357. Also see “Our trial”, ibid, 9/6/21. XXIII, 254-55; “The beginning of responsibility”, YI, 66/7/21. XIII, 381; Bombay Secret Abstracts, 1921. Ibid., 476.
  70. “Speech on Swadeshi”, Bombay, 1/8/21. TBC, 2-8-1921. XXIV, 38.
  71. “Implications of constructive programme”, Harijan, 18/8/40. LXXIX, 112.
  72. “The national flag”, YI, 13/4/21. XXIII, 33.
  73. “Speech at a prayer meeting”, New Delhi, 28/5/47. VC, 163.
  74. “Speech at a prayer meeting”, New Delhi, 12/6/47. Prarthana Pravachan –I. 95, 267.
  75. “Speech at AICC meeting”, New Delhi, 14/6/47. Bihar Pachhi Delhi. VC, 281.
  76. Autobiography. VIL, 304.
  77. “Interview to The Daily Herald, 16/3/21. XXII, 439.
  78. “The Khilafat”, YI, 23/3/21. XXII, 457-58.
  79. “Indians in South Africa”, YI, 6/4/21. 23, 3.
  80. “Interview in London” (before October 2, 1931), The Jewish Chronicle, 2-10-1931. LIII, 451-52.
  81. There is vast literature on repression of Jews in Europe which includes Christian Goeschel & Nikolaus Wachsmann, “Before Auschwitz: The formation of the Nazi concentration camps, 1933- 39”, Journal of Contemporary History, vol. 45, no. 3, July 2010, pp. 515-34; and Michael R. Marrus and Robert O. Paxton, “The Nazis and the Jews in occupied western Europe, 1940-1944”, The Journal of Modern History, vol. 54, no. 4,( December 1982), pp. 687-714.
  82. “The Jews”, Harijan, 26-11-1938. LXXIV, 239-42.
  83. “Reply to German critics”, Harijan, 17/12/38. Ibid., 295.
  84. Ibid, 297-99.
  85. “Discussion with Christian missionaries” before 12/12/38. Ibid, 309.
  86. “Is nonviolence ineffective”, Harijan, 7/1/39. Ibid, 393. The Managing Editor of Jewish Frontier (New York) sent him a copy of the March number with the request that Gandhi reply to his article on the Jews in Germany and Palestine. Gandhi concluded, “Nevertheless I wish with all my heart that somehow or other the persecution of the Jews in Germany will end and that the question in Palestine will be settled to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned”. “The Jewish question”, Harijan, 27/5/39. LXXV, 415-16.
  87. “Withdrawn”, Harijan, 27-5-1939. LXXV, 417-18.
  88. “Jews and Palestine”, Harijan, 21/7/1946. IXC, 272-73. For Jewish violence against Arabs in Palestine, refer to S. Shamir Hassan, “Zionism and terror: The creation of the state of Israel”, Proceedings of the Indian History Congress, vol. 62 (Indian History Congress, 2001), pp. 866-72.
  89. “Interview to Reuter”, 5/5/47. Harijan, 18/5/1947. XC, 27-28.
  90. “Message to Hindus”. The Hindu, 1/5/1947. VIC, 291.
  91. “Answers to question”, TBC, 2/6/47. VC, 180.
  92. Letter dt. Wardha, 31/8/38. LXXIII, 425. Such proposals remained inconsequential. Only about 2,000 German and Austrian Jews found refuge in India owing to the British policy.
  93. “Gandhi’s 80-year-old letter wishing Jews ‘era of peace’ unveiled by National Library of Israel”, The Hindustan Times, September 27, 2019.
  94. “Indian nationalist ideas about Palestine and Israel”, Jewish Social Studies, vol. 37, no. 3/4, Summer-Autumn, 1975, p. 225.
  95. “The Israeli-Palestinian conflict The source of the problem is the source of the solution”, World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues, vol. 23, no. 3, (Autumn 2019), pp. 58-65.
  96. “Gandhi’s views on the resolution of the conflict in Palestine: A note”, Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, Jan. 2009, pp. 127-33.
  97. For complete details see Squaring the circle: Mahatma Gandhi and the Jewish homeland (New Delhi: Knowledge World Publisher, 2017).

Courtesy: Gandhi Marg, Volume 45, Issue 1, April-June 2023

* Naseeb Benjamin is with Gokhale Institute of Politics & Economics, Pune 411 004. Email: benjaminnaseeb@gmail.com