What makes a person a Mahatma?
It is easy to look at the towering figure of Gandhi in hindsight—as the Father of a Nation, as a global icon of nonviolence. But such stature is not born overnight. It is forged in fire. One such crucible was a street in Natal, South Africa, in the year 1897. It was here that Mohandas Gandhi—still a young lawyer—was violently assaulted by a mob. But it was also here that something deeper was revealed: a quiet strength that would shape not only his own destiny, but the moral imagination of the world.
A Turning Point in Natal: The Mob That Couldn’t Shake a Mahatma
In 1897, upon returning to Durban from a visit to India—where he had spoken candidly about the condition of Indians in South Africa—Mohandas Gandhi found himself at the center of a storm. Exaggerated and inflammatory reports of his speeches, circulated among the white population in Natal, led to a public outcry. As a result, local authorities held Gandhi and his fellow Indian passengers on board their ship for 23 days, trying to prevent them from disembarking.
When legal pressure finally forced the authorities to release the passengers, Gandhi was met at the dock by an enraged mob. Accused of slandering Europeans and attempting to flood the colony with Indians, he was brutally attacked. His life was saved by the courage and cleverness of the local police superintendent and his wife, Mrs. Alexander, who disguised him and took him to safety.
Remarkably, in the aftermath, Gandhi refused to press charges against his attackers—even though the Natal government and British authorities were ready to prosecute. He insisted that the mob had acted out of ignorance and misinformation, and that punishing them would serve no higher purpose.
This incident, painful and humiliating as it was, became one of the defining moments in Gandhi’s transformation. It tested not only his courage but his commitment to the path of nonviolence. From that mob in Natal emerged not just a survivor—but a visionary who would go on to reshape the meaning of resistance itself.
Justice Then and Now: A Reflection
There is little point in comparing this historic incident with today’s loud calls for ‘justice’—many of which are driven more by the thirst for revenge than by a true concern for righteousness. Then, as now, misinformation and exaggerated accounts—once spread through print media and now virally through social media—can easily ignite mob frenzy, or what we might now call mobacracy.
Yet one of the lesser-recognized reasons Mohandas Gandhi evolved into Mahatma Gandhi was the presence of a certain moral conscience within British society. Despite the undeniable injustices of colonial rule, there still existed—among many in the British public and legal institutions—a foundational sense of justice. This often stood in contrast to the brutality of the colonial machinery itself. It was this moral undercurrent that allowed Gandhi, both in South Africa and later in India, to confront British authority with appeals not only to power but to principle. In a way, this very capacity for moral engagement in his opponents played a role in shaping Mohandas into the Mahatma.
While many democratic constitutions—including India’s—uphold noble ideals of justice and liberty, the political class entrusted with enacting these ideals often falls short. Politicians, compelled by the need to gain and retain power, frequently compromise on justice and principle. In a country like India, where religion is politicized and politics is communalized, governance has become the art of manipulation. Despite dharma being deeply woven into the Indian conscience, when it comes to administering justice, we have not only failed to produce another Mahatma—we have not even succeeded in fostering a true successor to his moral legacy.
Of course, there are individuals who have quietly remained faithful to the Gandhian path, holding fast to truth and nonviolence in their personal lives. Their lives are testimonies to Gandhi’s enduring relevance. But in an age when nations must constantly navigate global pressures and internal divisions, the emergence of another Mahatma seems increasingly difficult.
Conclusion: Gandhi’s Relevance Today
Still, that should not lead us to conclude that Gandhi’s life and message are outdated. Far from it. They remain eternally relevant—perhaps even more so now than before. For those willing to listen, to learn, and to imitate the spirit of his teachings, Gandhi continues to offer a living example of moral courage, compassionate resistance, and the power of truth.
Ashram
June 15, 2025.
The following is only a summary of this incident that happened in Natal. The full detail is available in Satyagraha in Sough Africa, www.mkorg.com pp. 57-64. One can find this in the Appendix below:
Natal Violence
In early 1897, Gandhi returned to Durban after visiting India, where he had spoken on the plight of Indians in South Africa. His speeches, misrepresented back home, stirred hostility among local whites. The South African authorities detained the entire Indian passenger list aboard the ship for 23 days, attempting to prevent them from landing at all.
Finally, when the law compelled the ship’s release, Gandhi
disembarked—only to be met by a mob of thousands, baying for his life, accusing him of “vilifying” Europeans and plotting to “flood Natal with Indians.” Aided by the discreet courage of the superintendent of police and his wife (known only as Mrs. Alexander), Gandhi was taken in disguise to a nearby house and from there safely escorted to the police station (mkgandhi.org, en.wikipedia.org).
To calm the crowd, the superintendent even offered to let a committee search the house to prove Gandhi hadn’t fled—and when none were found, the rioters dispersed peacefully. The police faced down what might have been a lynching through measured goodwill rather than force (mkgandhi.org).
In the aftermath, a Durban newspaper cleared Gandhi’s name; Europeans who had previously denounced him now expressed sympathy, acknowledging both his dignity and the Indians’ readiness to defend their rights .
The British Colonial Secretary, Joseph Chamberlain, demanded the Natal government prosecute the attackers. The attorney‑general and superintendent urged Gandhi to press charges. But Gandhi refused to take legal action—asserting that the rioters were misled, and that no real benefit would come from punishing them (en.wikipedia.org).
He later reflected that the incident had prepared him for the higher path of satyagraha—a method that would define his life’s work (mkgandhi.org).— M. K. Gandhi, Satyagraha in South Africa, THE SELECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI, VOLUME TWO, TRANSLATED FROM THE GUJARATI BY VALJI GOVINDJI DESAI. From
www.mkgandhi.org, pp. 57-64
Appendix
…As soon as we landed {from the Ship in Natal}, some boys saw us. As I was the only Indian who put on a turban of a particular type, they at once recognized me, began to shout ‘Gandhi’, ‘Gandhi’, ‘thrash him’, ’surround him’, and came up towards us. Some began to throw pebbles at us. A few elderly Europeans joined the boys. Gradually the party of rioters began to grow. Mr. Laughton thought that there was danger in our going on foot. He therefore hailed a rickshaw. I had never sat in a rickshaw before, as it was thoroughly disgusting to me to sit in a vehicle pulled by human beings. But I then felt that it was my duty to use that vehicle. I have experienced five or seven times in my life that one, whom God wishes to save, cannot fall even if he will. If I did not fall I cannot take any credit for it to myself. These rickshaws are pulled by Zulus. The elderly Europeans and the boys threatened the rickshaw puller that if he allowed me to sit in his rickshaw, they would beat him and smash his rickshaw to pieces. The rickshaw boy, therefore, said ‘Kha’ (meaning ‘no’) and went away. I was thus spared the shame of a rickshaw ride. We had no alternative now but to proceed to our destination on foot. A mob followed us. With every step we advanced, it grew larger and larger. The gathering was enormous when we reached West Street. A man of powerful build took hold of Mr. Laughton and tore him away from me. He was not therefore in a position to come up with me. The crowd began to abuse me and shower upon me stones and whatever else they could lay their hands on. They threw down my turban. Meanwhile a burly fellow came up to me, slapped me in the face and then kicked me. I was about to fall down unconscious when I held on to the railings of a house nearby. I look breath for a while and when the fainting was over, proceeded on my way. I had almost given up the hope of reaching home alive. But I remember well that even my heart did not arraign my assailants. While I was thus wending my way, the wife of the Superintendent of Police at Durban was coming from the opposite direction. We knew each other well. She was a brave lady. Although the sky was cloudy and the sun about to (p.58) set, she opened her sunshade for my protection and began to walk at my side. The Europeans would not insult a lady, especially the wife of the old and popular Superintendent of Police, nor would they hurt her. They must avoid injuring her while aiming blows at me. The injuries, therefore, which I received after she joined me, were not serious. Meanwhile the Superintendent of Police came to know of the attack upon me and sent and sent a party of constables for my protection. The police surrounded me. The Police Station was on our way. When we reached there I saw that the Superintendent of Police was waiting for us. He offered me asylum in Police Station, but I declined the offer with thanks and said, “I must reach my destination. I have faith in the fair play of the citizens of Durban and in the righteousness of my own cause. I am thankful to you for sending the police party for my protection. Mrs. Alexander too has contributed to my safety.” I reached Rustomji’s house without further trouble. It was nearly evening when I reached there. Dr. Dadibarjor, the medical officer of the s. s. Courland, who was with Rustomji Sheth, began to treat me. He examined my wounds. There were not many of them. One blind wound in particular was very painful. But I was not yet privileged to rest in peace. Thousands of Europeans gathered before Rustomji Sheth’s house. After nightfall, hooligans also joined the crowd. The crowd sent word to Rustomji Sheth that if he did not hand me over to them, they would burn him and his house along with me. Rustomji Sheth was too good an Indian to be daunted. When Superintendent Alexander came to know how matters stood, he quietly joined the crowd with a number of detectives. He sent for a bench and stood upon it. Thus under the pretence of talking to the crowd, he took possession of the entrance to Rustomji’s house so that none could break and enter it. He had already posted detectives at proper places. Immediately on arrival, he had instructed a subordinate to disguise himself as an Indian trader by putting on Indian dress and painting his face to see me and deliver to me the following message: “If you wish to save your friend, his guests and property, and your own family, I advise you to disguise yourself as an Indian constable, come out through Rustomji’s godown, steal through the crowd with my man and reach the Police Station. A carriage is (p.59) awaiting you at the corner of the street. This is the only way in which I can save you and others. The crowd is so excited that I am not in a position to control it. If you are not prompt in following my directions, I am afraid the crowd will raze Rustomji’s house to the ground and it is impossible for me to imagine how many lives will be lost and how much property destroyed.” I gauged the situation at once. I quickly disguised myself as a constable and left Rutomji’s house. The Police Officer and I reached the Police Station in safety. In the meantime Mr. Alexander was humouring the crowd by singing topical songs and talking to them. When he knew that I had reached the Police Station, he became serious and asked: “What do you want?” “We want Gandhi.” “What will you do with him?” “We will burn him.” “What harm has he done to you?” “He has vilified us in India and wants to flood Natal with Indians.” “What if he does not come out?” “We will then burn this house.” “His wife and children are also there. There are other men and women besides. Would you not be ashamed of burning women and children?” “The responsibility for that will rest with you. What can we do when you make us helpless in the matter? We do not wish to hurt anyone else. It would be enough if you hand over Gandhi to us. If you do not surrender the culprit, and if others are injured in our endeavour to capture him, would it be fair on your part to blame us?” The Superintendent gently smiled and informed the crowd that I had left Rustomji’s house, passed through their midst, and reached another place already. The crowd laughed loudly and shouted, “It is a lie, it is a lie.” (p.60) The Superintendent said : “If you will not believe your old Superintendent of Police, please appoint a committee of three or four men from amongst you. Let others promise that they will not enter the house, and that if the committee fail to find Gandhi in the house, you will peacefully return to your homes. You got excited today and did not obey the police. That reflects discredit on you, not on the police. The police therefore played a trick with you; it removed your prey from your midst and you have lost the game. You certainly cannot blame the police for this. The police, whom you yourselves have appointed, have simply done their duty.” The Superintendent addressed the crowd with such suavity and determination, that they gave him the promise he had asked for. A committee was appointed. It searched Rustomji’s house through and through, and reported to the crowd that the Superintendent was right and had beaten them in the game. The crowd was disappointed. But they kept their word and dispersed without committing any mischief. This happened on January 13, 1897. The same morning after the quarantine on the steamers had been removed, the reporter of a Durban newspaper had seen me on the steamer. He had asked me everything. It was quite easy to dispose of the charges against me to his satisfaction. I showed to him in detail that I had not indulged in the least exaggeration. What I had done was only my duty. If I had failed to discharge it, I would be unworthy of the name of the man. All this appeared in the newspapers the next day. Sensible people among the Europeans admitted their mistake. The newspapers expressed their sympathy with the standpoint of the Europeans in Natal, but at the same time fully defended my action. This enhanced my reputation as well as the prestige of the Indian community. It was proved that the Indians, poor as they were, were no cowards, and that the Indian traders were prepared to fight for their self-respect and for their country regardless of loss. Thus though the Indian community had to suffer hardship and though Dada Abdulla incurred big losses, the ultimate result, I believe, was entirely beneficial. The community had an opportunity of measuring their own strength (p.61) and their self-confidence increased in consequence. I had a most valuable experience, and whenever I think of that day, I feel that God was preparing me for the practice of Satyagraha. The events in Natal had their repercussion in England Mr. Chamberlain, Secretary of State for the Colonies, cabled to the Government of Natal asking them to prosecute my assailants and to see that justice was done to me. Mr. Escombe, who was Attorney-General with the Government of Natal, called me. He told me about Mr. Chamberlain’s cable. He expressed his regret for the injuries I had sustained, and his pleasure that the consequences of the assault were not more serious. He added, “I can assure you that I did not at all intend that you or any other member of your community should be injured. As I feared that you might possibly be hurt, I sent you word to say that you should land at night. You did not like my suggestion. I do not wish to blame you in the least that you accepted Mr. Laughton’s advice. You were perfectly entitled to do what you thought fit. The Government of Natal fully accepts Mr. Chamberlain’s demand. We desire that the offenders should be brought to book. Can you identify any of your assailants?” I replied : “I might perhaps to able to identify one or two of them. But I must say at once before this conversation proceeds that I have already made up my mind not to prosecute my assailants. I cannot see that they are at fault. What information they had, they had, they had obtained from their leaders. It is too much to expect them to judge whether it was correct or otherwise. If all that they heard about me was true, it was natural for them to be excited and do something wrong in a fit of indignation. I would not blame them for it. Excited crowds have always tried to deal out justice in that manner. If anyone is to blame it is the Committee of Europeans, you yourself and therefore, the Government of Natal. Reuter might have cabled any distorted account. But when you knew that I was coming to Natal, it was your duty and duty of the Committee to question me about the suspicions you entertained with regard to my activities in India, to hear what I had to say and then do what might appear proper in the circumstances. Now I cannot prosecute you or the Committee for (p. 62) the assault. And even if I could, I would not seek redress in a court of law. You took such steps as seemed advisable to you for safeguarding the interests of the Europeans of Natal. That is a political matter, and it remains for me to fight with you in the political field and to convince you and the other Europeans that the Indians who constitute a large proportion of the population of the British Empire wish to preserve their self-respect and safeguard their rights without injuring the Europeans in the least.” Mr. Escombe said, “I quite understand what you say, and I appreciate it. I was not prepared to hear that you were not willing to prosecute your assailants. I would not have been displeased in the least had you prosecuted them. But since you have signified your determination not to prosecute, I do not hesitate to say not only that you have come to a right decision in the matter, but you will render further service to your community by your self restraint. I must at the same time admit that your refusal to prosecute your assailants will save the Government of Natal from a most awkward position. If you so desire, the Government will see that your assailants are arrested but it is scarcely necessary to tell you that it would irritate the Europeans and to give rise to all manner of criticism, which no Government would relish. But if you have finally made up your mind not to prosecute, you should write to me a note signifying your intention to that effect. I cannot defend my Government merely by sending Mr. Chamberlain summary of our conversation. I should cable to him a summary of your note. I am not, however, asking you to let me have the note just now. You had better consult your friends. Consult Mr. Laughton also. And if after such consultations you still adhere to your resolution not to prosecute, write to me. But your note should clearly state that you, on your own responsibility, refuse to prosecute your assailants. Then only can I make use of it.” I said : “I had no idea that you had sent for me in this connection. I have not consulted any one on the subject, nor do I wish to consult any one now. When I decided to land and proceed with Mr. Laughton, I had made up my mind that I should not feel aggrieved in case I was injured. Prosecuting my assailants (p.63) is therefore out of the question. This is a religious question with me, and I believe with you that I shall serve my community as well as myself by this act of self-restraint. I propose, therefore, to take all the responsibility on my shoulders and to give you the note you ask for here and now. “ I then obtained some blank paper from him, wrote out the desired note and handed It over to him. 1. Issue of July 13, 1921 2. Issue of July 28 1921.—Satyagraha in Sough Africa, www.mkorg.com pp. 57-64
Leave a Reply