Thursday, April 28, 2011

The difference between Anna Hazare and Mahatma Gandhi

Anna Hazare, the social activist who has been in the news lately because of the Lokpal Bill, has been compared to Mahatma Gandhi. This post explains the similarities and differences between the two men by comparing their hands. But before I begin, it needs to be said that these two men couldn't be more different!

The major characteristics of Hazare’s hand are his strong mount of Moon, the deep and dark lines on his rather rectangular palm, the development of the lower part of the hand, and slightly short conic fingers accompanied by a long thumb. Mahatma Gandhi, on the other hand, has a squarer palm with a better balance of the mounts, a larger hand and longer fingers, telling us that he is quite different from Anna Hazare, although they could share
some common traits.

anna hazare sketch

Idealism and impressionability are the qualities they share, but Mahatma Gandhi’s thumb shows formidable willpower, and stubbornness to the point of unreasonableness, as well as strong mental resistance. Whether this was a great quality or not is not the question here. What this stubbornness did for Gandhi was that it helped him balance his impressionability and made him impervious to influence. He would stick to his guns no matter what.

Check out a hand photograph of his here and here and Mahatma Gandhi's here.

Anna Hazare's fingertips are conic, particularly the tip of the Jupiter (index) finger although the first phalange of this finger is short. The first phalanges of his fingers are average, overall, and the third phalanges quite developed. The thumb is long, a little high-set, and conic-tipped as well, with a strong first phalange. The Mercury (little) finger is long and the Apollo (ring) and the Jupiter (index) finger are balanced with each other in length. The Lower Mars mount is high as is the Moon mount. The life and head lines are joined considerably.

His hand features tell us that he is a little diffident and cautious and also something of a dreamer, with an inner timidity. Gandhi too was a dreamer (though to a lesser extent) and was a little timid as well, but Gandhi was less timid than Hazare is and he had a broader world-view. Hazare’s humble persona is something he shares with Gandhi but Mahatma Gandhi was more humble (but less timid); humble to the point of lacking sufficient self-esteem. But Gandhi’s other qualities, like his stubborn will and strong mental resistance, helped override his weakness.

Both Hazare and Gandhi's hands show the kind of aggression required to push through their agenda and both possess willpower but Hazare's hand does not show true leadership qualities. His thinking can be limited, and in fact strategic thinking is missing entirely. He may a doer, but may not be able to see the larger purpose. He does have the willingness to listen and accept others’ points of view. This is a great quality by itself, but when combined with idealism, and impressionability, as Anna Hazare's hand shows, it can become a stumbling block. Besides, Hazare hand shows that he lacks inner mental resistance, the kind of stubbornness to drive him to overcome all obstacles, however formidable they are. It makes him vulnerable to the influence of others. In such a case the person would require the ability to evaluate people well. Although Hazare does have the ability to understand people, the ability is far less as compared to Gandhi. He is also less shrewd and cunning as compared to Gandhi.

Anna Hazare is more of a doer than Gandhi ever was. Mahatma Gandhi was more of an intellectual. Both are capable and effective men, in their own way. Hazare is more likely to actually do things himself, act quickly and achieve much. But to the credit of Gandhi, he had a broader perspective which enabled him to see issues as a whole and a better ability to judge their impact. Hazare would be dependent on others to show him the way. His hand shows that he lacks the ability to be a true leader like Gandhi was and one of the reasons is that his perspective can be narrow.

Hazare's integrity and honesty (like Mahatma Gandhi’s) is high, but he can be used by others. His straightforwardness, almost like innocence, the ability to listen, humility and simplicity, timidity, idealism, and lack of cunning are his vulnerabilities. 

Related Reading: Read about eminent personalities in India's history like Jawaharlal Nehru and Dr Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan or find out about what Mahatma Gandhi's hand says.
Related Readings of some veteran and some modern Indian Politicians like Sonia Gandhi or Lal Krishna Advani or Mamata Banerjee or Narendra Modi or P. Chidambaram or Prime Minister Manmohan Singh or Mayawati or Nitin Gadkari, or Nitish Kumar or Kiran Bedi.

Or check out the hand reading of other Spiritual Leaders from all over the world.

Or read about other Indian Politicians and also international names by checking out all readings filed under the label "Politicians."


  1. One of the most insightful hand readings on this blog. Amazing how you peeled off the various layers of Hazare's personality!

  2. Brilliant analysis. Though one could come to similar conclusions by looking at the events, this post is an excellent reference for comparing two great persons. Your balanced analysis of positive and negative qualities makes it a good read.

    Destination Infinity

  3. Thanks. And if the events collaborate the marks on the palm, I guess that is a thumbs up for palmistry. Palmistry is I think better than any personality test because one cannot hide the marks on the hand while one can fake tests and also fool people!

  4. I have been following the political events closely but could not have reached this conclusion. It was only after reading this post that I started to have doubts about people like Kiran Bedi (whom I respect) who are advising him. I also thought of Gandhi as a doer, but now after reading this and comparing him with Hazare I think you are right, Gandhi was more of a spiritual leader rather than a doer (despite the Salt March).
    What worries me in this analysis is that you say that Hazare's palm shows that he does not have strong mental resistance. I thought he had, from the events. But now I think maybe not...I don't know.

  5. TN, you have to keep in mind that this is a comparison. Everything is as compared to one another. For example Hazare is not cunning as compared to Gandhi, but it does not mean he is a fool.

  6. I am sure that he isnt exactly the non-corrupt or the ideal sorts that he is made out to be...infact its funny people actually believe that you can find somebody like that anywhere!...even if each one of us tries to do the right thing...atleast as long as we are comfortable with it...we can still live a better life! and not really leave everything in the hands of politicians...
    we are not fighters...after serious observation I feel we dont know how to live a good life.
    I am sure baba ramdev mustve provided him with a lot of benefits...because I heard he is coming up with his new party...
    plus you cant stage a movement like this without monetary support

  7. No, he is certainly not that ideal, he is weak in my opinion. Gandhi never wanted to be part of any commission or party, but Anna Hazare does. I am not saying he shouldn't, but just that he is nothing like Gandhi.

  8. Good analysis, Nita. Both of them are infact quite different personalities. I don't know whether its hypocrisy or sheer crudeness in Anna's approach, as he seems to contradict his proclaimed Gandhian ideology- e.g. wants the anti-corruption movement to be peaceful and at the same time advocates tying up alcoholics and flogging them :-) Latest, goof-up on the Sharad Pawar incident. He may certainly not have material desires but he doesn't come across as a person he portrays himself to be. Request you not to read Ramdev's palms(you don't need to,it's written all over the face) ;-)

  9. Thanks Draupad. About the flogging etc for drunkards, well he has always been doing it, much before the anti-corruption campaign. That is how he cleaned up certain villages of drunkards. Hazare is not a thinker (although he is an idealist) and therefore he can never be at heart a non-violent person. Only intellectuals and thinkers can be non-violent. However I think its best not to hate Hazare for not being Gandhian. He is at least better than our politicians who have no ideals or noble purpose. And I have already read Ramdev's palms, much before he was exposed for being what he is!

  10. Nita, how are you able to keep apart what you already know about public figures (from the media and your own judgement) from your palm reading. Does it not subconsciously affect your reading? I mean don't you think that it makes you look for confirmations of what you already know or believe about the person?

  11. Sonu, It is quite impossible to keep that apart unless I stop reading and absorbing the world around me. However, my method of working is different. I do invariably look for signs confirming a known personality trait of a famous person. If the signs are not present, either I say so (if it is a well known trait) or I do not mention it at all. Ofcourse I look for confirmation. I do not see anything wrong in that. There are various well known traits which I have said do not exist and that is also interesting because you can find out if the celeb is a fake. But then all of the reading is not about this. More often than not, I also see things which are not known.


Your polite comments are welcome! And those who use the name "Anonymous" may not get their comments published because it becomes difficult to distinguish between different commentators. You don't have to use your real name but do use some name! Thanks.