Raghuramaraju, (ed.) Debating Vivekananda: A Reader, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2014
When I read this book, I got the impression that Swami Vivekananda either assumed he was the ‘chosen’ spokesperson and reformer of Hindus, or this view was imposed on him by the initial attention he drew after his Chicago address. Instead of attempting his reform on a small-scale and locally, he envisioned it for all of India (or even to the world as India would become the world’s guru) with misguided zeal and enthusiasm. The initial success he managed to see and tasted made him think that his ideals and agenda would work for the entire country and to the world (through his ‘Vedanta’). As Killingley observed:
‘…Vivekananda seems to have believed in future changes in the world that would both result from natural forces and depend on people’s response to his own exhortations.’—Yoga-Sutra IV, 2-3 and Vivekananda’s Interpretation of Evolution. D. H. Killingley, pp. 441-473, p. 464
It is good that he didn’t live enough to see the way his mission and movement retreated to the margins of the Hindu world, similar to many other attempts in the past begun in religious, social, cultural, and other areas (e.g. several bhakti sects, Ram Mohan Roy in social and cultural areas, the Brahma Samaj, Arya Samaj). Though we debate his legacy and see a visible presence of the Ramakrishna Mission throughout the world, the Hindu Worldview has managed to absorb Vivekananda’s words as a part of its own and keep its heterogeneity not only in its religious, social, and cultural identity but also as a civilization that entertains ‘change and continuity’ as before.
If we have learned any lesson after debating Vivekananda, it is to not carry on based on the opinion of others. We must know our personal limitations first to understand the complexity of the heterogeneous nature of Indian society which refuses to budge to any attempt to homogenize with any kind of personal ideals or zeal with initial enthusiasm received with great uproar. Once the initial commotion and emotion settle down and when life begins to take its own natural course, every idealist like Vivekananda who was carried out by such commotion and emotion will be debated like this.
Swami Vivekananda’s conflicting statements to different audiences clearly paints a picture that he tried to play to the gallery.1 Without one consistent basic principle, if someone is carried away by the opinions of others, he will end up contradicting himself. He had several opportunities to talk to many groups and address their issues. But he could not avoid contradiction; he approached the issues as per his mood and context rather than having one consistent principle. This reminds me of a saying: allow a person to talk more; then she will end up contradicting herself.
One consistent principle or dogma that Swamiji had was ‘experience’ as the only evidence. But when he tried to base that experience on other doctrines like Advaita, science, and Yoga, it failed to communicate what he actually wanted.
An ordinary lay person like me has no right to question or criticise a giant like Swamiji, since he still continues to exercise his influence around the world. But because he was my ideal and role-model in my teenage years, now that I have better understood his life and experience, I am bit disappointed. At the same time I am thankful for his zeal and dedication to live out what he believed true and to continue to help people like me learn from his life.
One good lesson I learned is to have a minimum principle as the foundation for my life and sharing. For me, that is that I am A SINNER SAVED BY THE GRACE OF GOD THROUGH BHAGAVAN MUKTINATH. When my life or sharing begins to contradict this principle (or doctrine if you like to call it), then instead of shifting my goal and views according to the influence and opinion of others, I will analyse it based on my principle (or experience if you like to name it) and accept those that enhance my principle to lead a better life as a Muktinath bhakta rather than playing to the gallery.
Vivekananda was torn between his ‘private Hinduism’2 which he constructed for himself and the one he projected for others. He tried to homogenize by citing the ideal whereas the reality of Hinduism remained completely different than what he tried to project or present. His Practical Vedanta has nothing in common with the Vedanta philosophy that is promoted by traditional acharyas and their sampradayas, except using the word ‘Vedanta’.
As Jyotirmaya Sharma says, “…In the battle between dualism and Practical Vedanta, Vivekananda remained a passionate participant and a sincere seeker” (374). Anyone who wants to debate Vivekananda and his legacy must begin here. How far his legacy is faithfully carried on by the very Institute he inaugurated needs to be seriously considered. If my understanding is correct, many Ramakrishna Missions/Ashrams/Mutts remain autonomous with their own ideals, plans, and agendas which have nothing to do with his legacy. (See: T. S. Rukmani, Samnyasi in the Hindu tradition, Changing Perspectives, New Delhi, D.K. Printworld (p) Ltd. 2011.)
We have to note here that even the Ramakrishna Mission went to court seeking minority status since it was not willing to call itself part of Hinduism (purely for the economic benefit of getting minority favours from the government). The question is not whether they are right or wrong, but how does Vivekananda’s legacy give the freedom for his own movement to re-interpret that legacy to carry out his mission and vision that he started in the name of his guru, who never would have understood his Practical Vedanta?
In his recent visit to South Asian countries, PM Modi, while unveiling a Statue of Swami Vivekananda, said that the name ‘Vivekananda’ was more of a legacy than the name of a person. (I don’t remember Modi’s exact words.) In our contemporary Indian reality, scholars debate about Swamiji and Vivekananda will continue to remain a (new) legacy irrespective of any clear understanding or articulation of what that legacy actually was or is.
Recently, Sri Ramanan (known as ‘the music poet), gave a talk on Makkal T.V. at 6:30am on either 13th or 14th February said that Swami Vivekananda was the champion for the Independence movement, which no one can deny. This shows how shallow their view about Vivekananda is, though such speakers often do proper research on the topic of their talk. But the reality is that Swamiji never wanted or sought independence from British rule3.
‘In his mind, the threat of British subjugation is visualized in terms of its moral effects rather than its political consequences. “Freedom” in his vocabulary is not secular political freedom, but the spiritual personal liberation from the bonds of ignorance’. (Swami Vivekananda. A Case Study of the Hindu Religious Tradition and the Modern Secular Ideal. Krishna Prakash Gupta. Pp.263-290, p.272)
And:
…Actually, when one of its distinguished members, Sister Nivedita, wanted to join the national movement, she was given a warning notice and asked to quit the Mission work. This was in pursuance of a deliberate policy of operating strictly on non-political levels. Between the secular attainment of freedom and the non-secular realization of liberation, there was hardly any choice….4—ibid. p. 273
After studying him in-depth, various scholars have supported and critiqued Vivekananda, and it is beyond a lay person like to me to dare to write any review on this book. The way Swami Vivekananda is analyzed, appraised, appreciated, condemned, critiqued, criticized, reviewed, viewed, glorified, etc., I feel sorry for him. I wonder if he himself would have understood the way he is analyzed with contemporary views superimposed on him. Sometimes I think it is better to live and die an unknown person rather than to live and die as a celebrity. The cost that they pay after their death is too heavy compared with what they paid when they were alive.
Several of Swami Vivekananda’s thoughts and statements cannot be stretched beyond a particular context. By keeping one topic and pulling all his statements which he made on various occasions in a different context to analyze him, we get a rather muddied picture about him rather than any clarity. At the same time, I appreciate the ability of these scholars who can bring some structural understanding about Vivekananda and his legacy. But for me, it is better to let him remain as he was like any other typical Hindu—a pluralist. Systemization will help us present and understand some thoughts or people but it will never give the real picture about them. The interesting point for me is that such kind of debate will continue without any end or arriving at any conclusion.
I was immensely benefited by the contribution of these scholars to begin a serious debate about Swamiji as he remains the first inspiration in my life.
10-1-16
Endnotes
- Though Vivekananda sometimes appears, and no doubt intended to appear, as having come from India with a message, for the West, there are indications that some features of his message were developed during his first Western tour, and that his reading of the Sanskrit tradition was modified in the light of ideas picked up in the West….— Yoga-Sutra IV, 2-3 and Vivekananda’s Interpretation of Evolution. D. H. Killingley, pp.441-473, in A. Raghuramaraju, (ed.) Debating Vivekananda: A Reader, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2014 p. 466
- And together [Vivekananda and a few other disciples of Sri Ramakrishna] we conceived that this ideal had to be spread. And not only spread, but made practical. That is to say, we must show the spirituality of the Hindus, the mercifulness of the Buddhists, the activity of the Christians, the brotherhood of the Mohammedans by our practical lives.{ The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda,Vol. VIII, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta, 1999 (first published in 1951), pp. 79-80}
While theoretically Vedanta embraced all religions and contained their essence, earlier Vivekananda had posited an evolutionary schema of development of different faiths. Hinduism had scaled the heights of perfection whereas other religions were still evolving. Vivekananda’s Practical Vedanta was a blow even to his own highly (p.366) purified redefinition of Hinduism. Practical Vedanta had privileged bread over God, the ‘proletariat’ in preference to the Brahmins, service over the tyranny of the wise and love over the absolute authority of the Upanishads. Islam and Christianity were no longer barbarian faiths, mired in dualism, but equal partners in the realization of Practical Vedanta. Buddhism was no longer the destroyer of Vedic religion. A curious inversion had taken place.
This was Vivekananda’s ‘private’ Hinduism….— Swami Vivekananda, Jyotirmaya Sharma, pp. 330-380, in ibid, pp. 366-67
3. …Vivekananda sternly rebuked his countrymen for raising the ‘eternal cry of Give’ before the British rulers. ‘What more they will give you,’ he asked, ‘they have given you railways, telegraphs, well ordered administration to the country—have almost suppressed robbers, have given education in science—what more will they give you?…. Well, they have given you so much; let me ask what have you given them in return?’ {Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Vol. V, Almora, 1936, p. 270} Vivekananda deliberately closed his eyes to those blessings of British rule which had once brought curses on his lips: ‘Vengeance of God … will come upon the English; they have their heels upon our neck, they have sucked the last drop of our blood for their own pleasures, they have carried away with them millions of our money, while our people have starved by villages and provinces….’ {Burke, Marie Luise, Swami Vivekananda in America: New Discoveries, Calcutta, 1958, p. 24} He had then defined English civilization as ‘composed of three Bs—Bible, bayonet, and brandy.’{Ibid, p. 534} But after his trip abroad he discovered in England ‘a nation of heroes, the true Kshatriyas.’ His opinions underwent a change….— The Political and Social Dimensions of Vivekananda’s Ideology. Prabha Dixit. Pp. 18-44, p. 28
4. 84. To avoid the displeasure of the British Government Sister Nivedita’s membership of the Mission was terminated, and various rules and regulations were framed making it impossible for the revolutionaries to abuse the hospitality of the Mission or to exploit its name for obtaining recruits during the Swadeshi movement. The authorities of the Mission gloated with pride in having converted some revolutionary young men of Bengal into peaceful monks. The Governor of Bengal was duly informed of the aim of the Mission through a memorandum submitted to him in 1917. ‘The acceptance of such (p.43) novices [revolutionaries] would be for the purpose of leading them from the points of view these express, to the new and inward life of religion which is the ideal of the Mission, and to that active discipline of social service which is its daily exclusive aim.’ The list of those converted to the Mission’s ideal of ‘inward life’ contained the name of Debrata Bose, Sachin Sen (of Maniktola Bomb Case), Priyanath, Satish, and many others. These indirect services to the cause of British imperialism did not go unrewarded. The Mission had the good fortune of enjoying the patronage of the British Government in the form of various grants and concessions till 1947, See The History of the Ramakrishna Math and Mission, Calcutta, 1957}pp. 211-18}.—84. To avoid the displeasure of the British Government Sister Nivedita’s membership of the Mission was terminated, and various rules and regulations were framed making it impossible for the revolutionaries to abuse the hospitality of the Mission or to exploit its name for obtaining recruits during the Swadeshi movement. The authorities of the Mission gloated with pride in having converted some revolutionary young men of Bengal into peaceful monks. The Governor of Bengal was duly informed of the aim of the Mission through a memorandum submitted to him in 1917. ‘The acceptance of such (p.43) novices [revolutionaries] would be for the purpose of leading them from the points of view these express, to the new and inward life of religion which is the ideal of the Mission, and to that active discipline of social service which is its daily exclusive aim.’ The list of those converted to the Mission’s ideal of ‘inward life’ contained the name of Debrata Bose, Sachin Sen (of Maniktola Bomb Case), Priyanath, Satish, and many others. These indirect services to the cause of British imperialism did not go unrewarded. The Mission had the good fortune of enjoying the patronage of the British Government in the form of various grants and concessions till 1947, See The History of the Ramakrishna Math and Mission, Calcutta, 1957}pp. 211-18}.— The Political and Social Dimensions of Vivekananda’s Ideology. Prabha Dixit. Pp. 18-44 notes, 84, pp. 43-44