“Karmanye Vadhikaraste Ma Phaleshu Kadachana, Ma Karma Phala Hetur Bhurmatey Sangostva Akarmani” (Performing the action is your only right, not the attachment to its results. Never perform the act for the result yet never be found inactive”)

Gandhi knew only one YOGA, that of action – Karma – and that too in the way Krishna taught in the Bhagavad Gita. He strove to embody the spirit of this shloka throughout his life and succeeded, even if partially.

The postcolonial Indian mind often covets Western-conferred awards as the highest form of recognition, seeing them as proof of worth—Nobel Prizes, literary awards, medals, scholarships, and, in modern times, the Oscars and Grammys. Second in line are government-sponsored national awards. Indeed, most of us act for results, and the process often betrays a lust for popularity and illusory superiority. The end justifies the means.

Gandhi was not only different in himself; the world also responded differently to him, as if everyone acted according to his will. Though Gandhi was nominated five times for the Nobel Peace Prize between 1937 and 1948, politics kept the prize from him. Even posthumously, he likely accepted the outcome as it was.

Inadvertently, the Nobel Committee has honored him. Gandhi never coveted any position or prize. He stands apart, reminding us of our fallacies and the worthlessness of material accolades. Though he never cared, his country still laments the omission. Nobel Committees have faced constant criticism, but Gandhi himself would likely have exonerated them.

While most Nobel awards are decided by Swedish academies, the Peace Prize is awarded by a committee appointed by the Norwegian Storting (Parliament). Whatever transpired behind closed doors during the five occasions when Gandhi was nominated resurfaces whenever the Peace Prize is awarded to an international figure. Dalai Lama’s award, for instance, was described as “partially a tribute to Gandhi.” Dag Hammarskjöld was awarded posthumously in 1961, yet Gandhi was not in 1948. In fact, no living person was deemed worthy that year. Great activists inspired by Gandhi, such as Martin Luther King Jr., repeatedly remind the world of this gap in global politics.

Politics inevitably intervenes in any decision from political bodies, and the Peace Prize is no exception. It is not only about personal peace, nonviolence, or religious tolerance. Peace for individual salvation could qualify many ascetics, but the award recognizes the impact of one’s peace initiatives, social activism, and efforts to bridge gaps for humane life to flourish.

Here, distortions and political considerations crept in. No one else fit the bill as aptly as Gandhi in the last century. Immediate reactions often reflected Eurocentric perspectives or flawed committee judgments. But the cause was Gandhi himself.

During and after his lifetime, Gandhi evoked sharply contradictory ideas. The Nobel Committee struggled to reconcile them. Initially, he was nominated by Western sympathizers – liberals marginalized and opposed to colonialism – but rejected for “sharp turns in his policies, which can hardly be satisfactorily explained by his followers. (…) He is a freedom fighter and a dictator, an idealist and a nationalist. He is frequently a Christ, but then, suddenly, an ordinary politician.” This encapsulates the confusion.

Later, Gandhi was nominated by Indians, often via letters or telegraphic messages, including the year of his death. Whether he was seriously considered in these later nominations is unclear, though politics likely confounded even the most impartial minds.

This case highlights the fallacy of analyzing Gandhi outside his cultural and philosophical context. Linear, reductionist Western thinking struggled with his actions, which perplexed even Indian pundits.

Peace activists criticized him for “ignoring the black population” in South Africa, labeling him selfishly Indian and nationalist rather than universally minded. Later, in India, moderate protests against the British gradually took on an agitational spirit by 1920. Despite being a nonviolent movement, incidents like Chauri Chaura recurred. Gandhi himself was severely critical, yet many failed to recognize that he remained a focused Satyagrahi, adhering to ahimsa and truth. He was criticized for inciting movements that occasionally led to violence.

Gandhi’s expressions of frustration over violence sometimes seemed as if he might abandon Ahimsa. In a speech on India-Pakistan relations post-1947, he once even suggested war if relations could not improve. These statements were often taken at face value amid widespread mistrust. Whether the Nobel Committee avoided awarding him to not anger the British or European allies remains uncertain.

The Nobel Committee cannot be blamed for overlooking Gandhi, but it certainly missed the opportunity to recognize Ahimsa and truth as tools for social change, and the profound confluence of East and West in his thinking.

Dr. Alok Bajpai is a Psychiatrist trained at NIMHANS, Bangalore, working at Kanpur after few stints abroad. Apart from practicing Psychiatry, a consistent focus of his work is with children, adolescent and youth, being associated with various Institutes and schools. His work extends beyond the confines of clinic into freelance teaching of mental health issues and life skills. Psychiatry, Physics, Film, Music, Literature and Teaching are only some of the things that occupy Dr. Alok Bajpai’s wide world. He has been instrumental in putting together many awareness campaigns and workshops – especially with schools and has trained teachers – aiming at increasing sensitivity towards childhood problems, in many Indian cities.

(Cover Photo Credit: Canva)

AhimsaKarmaMahatma GandhiNobel CommitteeNobel Laureate Maria Corina MachadoNobel Peace PrizeNobel PrizesTruth