Vivekananda's Speech

[shvu]

 

Here are some excerpts from Vivekananda's Speech at the Parliament of religions, held at Chicago in 1893.

 

I am proud to belong to a religion which has taught the world both tolerance and universal acceptance. We believe not only in universal toleration, but we accept all religions as true. I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth. I am proud to tell you that we have gathered in our bosom the purest remnant of the Israelites, who came to Southern India and took refuge with us in the very year in which their holy temple was shattered to pieces by Roman tyranny. I am proud to belong to the religion which has sheltered and is still fostering the remnant of the grand Zoroastrian nation. I will quote to you, brethren, a few lines from a hymn which I remember to have repeated from my earliest boyhood, which is every day repeated by millions of human beings: "As the different streams having their sources in different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to Thee."

 

The present convention, which is one of the most august assemblies ever held, is in itself a vindication, a declaration to the world of the wonderful doctrine preached in the Gita: "Whosoever comes to Me, through whatsoever form, I reach him; all men are struggling through paths which in the end lead to me."

 

The seed is put in the ground, and earth and air and water are placed around it. Does the seed become the earth, or the air, or the water? No. It becomes a plant. It develops after the law of its own growth, assimilates the air, the earth, and the water, converts them into plant substance, and grows into a plant.

 

Similar is the case with religion. The Christian is not to become a Hindu or a Buddhist, nor a Hindu or a Buddhist to become a Christian. But each must assimilate the spirit of the others and yet preserve his individuality and grow according to his own law of growth.

 

 

Cheers

[Maitreya]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>...preserve his indivuality...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

Well that sound's like a good idea.

[Guest guest]

Dear Shvuji

 

Some scholars say that Vivekananda wasn't a brahma-vadi, actually he was a sakta. Do you know something about it?

 

Others say that he was the first to establish the "daridra-narayana" thesis, that is a Christian synchretism: "The service of man is the service of God." He was a pioneer in philanthropic activities linked with Hinduism. Before him no Hindu sect had ever made such activities, like hospitals, asylums, and so on. Therefore he was in fact more influenced by Westerns than anything else.He was a kind of docile native who was made a national hero by the British raj. Saintly-stateman, an official sannyasi.

 

Others say that he was an avatara, as well as Ramakrsna.

 

We read that his opinion on Gaudiya-Vaisnavas was that they are a sex religion, as that was the main stream of Gaudiya-vaisnavism at his time; i.e., sahajyism and sahajyias sects linked with Gaudiya-Vaisnavism.

 

Orthodox Hindus hate him because he had no eating restrictions, as he use to say: "One can eat whatever he likes, this doesn't matter in religion." And also made free distribution of "Bhagavan ka prasada," food offered to Kali, that is not vegetarian.

 

 

Yata mata tata patha, the doctrine that all paths lead to the Supreme is also very censured by many schools of sanatana-dharma. Vivekananda,Ramakrsna, Aurobindo and others were very enthusiastic defenders of this thesis.

 

Anyway, a very controversial personality.

 

Do you known who has written his hagiography?

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

[shvu]

Hey SD, Jijaji, Maitreya et al.,

 

The forum looks more like VNN's now. Is Nostalgia in?

 

Cheers

 

[This message has been edited by shvu (edited 05-08-2001).]

[ggohil]

Sorry Shvu, just testing.

 

 

C:\Girish\Krsna-Reduced

[shvu]

Hi Girish,

 

The image has to be on a web-server.

 

Cheers

[jijaji]

I dig the new style daddy-o!

 

jijaji

 

 

[jijaji]

quote:

 

We read that his opinion on Gaudiya-Vaisnavas was that they are a sex religion, as that was the main stream of Gaudiya-vaisnavism at his time; i.e., sahajyism and sahajyias sects linked with Gaudiya-Vaisnavism.

 

> That is interesting because Sri Ramakrishna himself practiced Raganuga to Sri Krishna and visited with the Gaudiya Vaishnavs of Braja when he went there. In the intro to 'The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna' there is description of Sri Ramakrishna even dressing in sari to have mood of gopi when going through his Krishna sadhana stage.

I would like to see the Vivekananda quote regarding his equating Gaudiya Vaishnavism with Sex Religion...if he did he differed with his Guru Sri Ramakrishna in this regard.

 

jijaji

 

------------------

PEACE NOW

 

[This message has been edited by jijaji (edited 05-08-2001).]

[jijaji]

IS THERE ANYBODY OUT THERE?

 

From the 'The Wall'

 

Pink Floyd

 

 

jijaji

 

------------------

PEACE NOW

[jijaji]

"The Eternal Religion, the religion of the rishis, has been in existence from time out of mind and will exist eternally. There exists in this Sanatana Dharma all forms of worship - worship of God with form and worship of the Impersonal Deity as well. It contains all paths - the path of knowledge, the path of devotion, and so on. Other forms of religion, the modern cults, will remain for a short time and then disappear."

- Sri Ramakrishna

 

 

 

------------------

PEACE NOW

[amanpeter]

I have a small book from Ramakrishna Mission, by Swami Vivekananda, entitled "Bhakti Yoga". Raganuga is called Para-Bhakti. I'll try quoting a little here:

 

"Wherever there is any bliss, even though in the most sensual of things, there is a spark of that Eternal Bliss which is the Lord Himself." Even in the lowest kinds of attraction there is the germ of divine love. One of the names of the Lord in Sanskrit is Hari, and this means that He attracts all things to Himself. He is in fact the only attraction worthy of human hearts. Who can attract a soul really? Only He! Do you think dead matter can truly attract the soul? It never did and never will. When you see a man going after a beautiful face, do you think that it is the handful of arranged material molecules which really attracts the man? Not at all. Behind those material particles there must be and is the play of divine influence and divine love. The ignorant man does not know it, but yet, conciously or unconciously, he is attracted by it and it alone. So even the lowest forms of attraction derive their power from God Himself.

 

"None, O beloved, ever loved the husband for the husband's sake; it is the atman, the Lord who is within, for whose sake the husband is loved." Loving wives may know this or they may not; it is true all the same. "None, O beloved, ever loved the wife for the wife's sake, but it is the Self in the wife that is loved." Similarly, no one loves a child or anything else in the world except on account of Him who is within. The Lord is the great magnet, and we are all like iron filings, we are being constantly attracted by Him, and all of us are struggling to reach Him. All this struggling of ours in this world is surely not intended for selfish ends. Fools do not know what they are doing; the work of their life is, after all, to approach the great magnet. All the tremendous struggling and fighting in life is intended to make us go to Him ultimately and be one with Him.

 

The Bhakti-yogi, however, knows the meaning of life's struggles; he understands it. He has passed through a long series of these struggles, and knows what they mean. (p,72-3)

 

A ship, all of a sudden, comes near a magnetic rock, and it's iron bolts and bars are all attracted and drawn out, and the planks get loosened and freely float on the water. Divine grace thus loosens the binding bolts and bars of the soul, and it becomes free. So in this renunciation auxiliary to devotion, there is no harshness, no dryness, no struggle, nor suppression. The Bhakta has not to suppress any single one of his emotions, he only strives to intensify them and direct them to God. (p.69)

 

------------------

Hare Krsna Hare Krsna

Krsna Krsna Hare Hare

Hare Rama Hare Rama

Rama Rama Hare Hare

[jijaji]

Groovey...

 

jijaji

 

------------------

PEACE NOW

[shvu]

Hi SD,

 

Some scholars say that Vivekananda wasn't a brahma-vadi, actually he was a sakta. Do you know something about it?

Ramakrishna was a shakta, and later was more an Advaitin. Far as I know, Vivekananda was never a Shakta. He was mostly a skeptic, until after he had some 'experience' by coming in contact with RK. Since then he was an Advaitin too.

 

He was a kind of docile native who was made a national hero by the British raj. Saintly-stateman, an official sannyasi.

Something on those lines, I would say. He was also into patriotism and social service, along with Philosophy. So he was a combination of different aspects.

 

Others say that he was an avatara, as well as Ramakrsna.

Trust disciples to call their respective Gurus as Avatars Someone has even written a Ramakrishna Upanishad. Someday there may even popup a Vivekananda Upanishad.

 

Orthodox Hindus hate him because he had no eating restrictions, as he use to say: "One can eat whatever he likes, this doesn't matter in religion." And also made free distribution of "Bhagavan ka prasada," food offered to Kali, that is not vegetarian.

True. It must also be noted that Vivekanada did not have traditional training in Vedanta, just like most other Neo-vedantins of recent times. Another reason why orthodox scholars will not take him seriously.

 

Yata mata tata patha, the doctrine that all paths lead to the Supreme is also very censured by many schools of sanatana-dharma. Vivekananda,Ramakrsna, Aurobindo and others were very enthusiastic defenders of this thesis.

Yes, the Neo-vedantins tend more towards such an idea. Of course, this is definitely against the orthodox view.

 

Do you known who has written his hagiography?

No. One of the many Anandas of the RK camp, I guess.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

Hagiography and Sacred Literature

 

 

The hagiographic style of biography is the one that only enhances some aspects of the personality of the hero. In other words, anyone can be transformed in a saint, if we increase his saintly behavior and ignore his humans bad habits. Hagiographies are very common in India and many of ISKCON leaders were transformed into temporary saints by this method. Many dubious babajis, yogis, and philosophers were also transformed into saints and avataras by this style of biography.

 

The sacred lore is written in mystical trance, or samadhi, that's to say, it is not an ordinary composition made by any baddha-jiva. Only those who are in samadhi are fit to fully understand the character and behavior of maha-bhagavatas and to make a bona fide biography on their lives. Westerns in general, as newcomers in spiritual topics, are very influenced by these kind of sentimental writings.

 

[Guest guest]

 

Dear Shvuji. Thank you for the answers.

 

For certain we cannot consider Vivekananda, Ramakrsna, Sivananda and others 'neo-advaitavadis' as pure brahma-vadis or as bona fide followers of Sankaracarya's line.

 

Do you think that many of the misconceptions that are now attributed to Sankaracarya's philosophy is due the misrepresentation that was made by these missions in West? If so, please point out some evidences, specially regarding Sankara's orthodoxy and the deviations made by these missions on his line.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[shvu]

 

Hagiography has always been a strong point with Indians. All the biographies of religious personalities, without exception are hagiographic with stories such as, Shankara did Parayakaya-pravesha into a dying king, Madhva met Vyasa, and so on. There are tons of such stories. Even in recent times, Gurus have known to be described as avatars by their followers. Examples are,

 

Ramana was an avatar of Kartikeya because he was surrounded by peacocks and carried a staff.

 

Shirdi Sai-baba was an avatar of Dattatreya because he lived as a recluse.

 

J Krishnamurti is an avatar of the Buddha because he spoke like him.

 

The funny thing is a few Kalkis popped up in the last decade. Many christians thought that 2000 would be judgement day. Not to be left behind, some Indians also said that 2000 would be pralaya time, which created an opportunity for the coming of a Kalki. And the Kalkis started arriving One famous guy with a long beard in Madras was worshipped by many. He was into the usual gimmicks of bringing ash out of thin air, etc. Last time I heard of him, he was in Jail. I guess the other Kalkis are also out of business by now.

 

Cheers

 

 

------------------

Dear is Plato, but dearer still is Truth - Aristotle

[Guest guest]

>> Shankara did Parayakaya-pravesha into a dying king, Madhva met Vyasa...

 

Yes, that's why we always stress the absolute necessity of to attain samadhi state. First find a bona fide samadhi's master and under his direction one may witness the veracity of these events. Not otherwise.

 

Many of the narratives on the life histories of these sadhus and avataras are true, but there are a lot of fakes included. In a first step one should learn how to conciliate the siddhanta of these events, that is more palpable to beginners. In both examples that you gave the siddhanta is correct, it gives one a hint on how the samadhi is attained by different methods.

 

As the siddhanta, tattva and its realization in samadhi state are not for ordinary readers, some sastras are written in sutras, aphoristic style, that prevents more frauds. Only those who are well versed in the science that they are dealing are fit to explain their meaning.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

I think there was a kalki bubble created, which had no real demand. After 2000 the Kalki bubble burst, and a lot of people were left with nothing concrete to hold on to.

 

But those Kalkis that had strong fundamentals managed to weather the big crash; and eventually as the Kali yuga progresses, they may even rise to the undisputed position of God, that is if they can gather enough votes and strategic investors. Strategic partnerships are essential when demand is shrinking and supply is increasing.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Yata mata tata patha

 

This doctrine is consider as a Christian concept into the 'neo-advaita-vada' philosophy. As Sankara's mayavada is the main advaitavada doctrine nowadays, it is clear that yata mata tata patha is polluting Sankara's mayavada, as well as many darsnam.

 

This doctrine says that Siva, Durga, Ganesa, Visnu, Krsna, and so on are all different names and forms of the same one Bhagavan. Bhagavan aspect of the Absolute Truth may be attained whichever viewpoint ome may have, and whichever devata you worship.

 

They employ the following metaphor to corroborate their thesis: "When one goes up the sky, all things are seen equally. Although letters are posted in different post-offices, they all arrive the same place. One can reach Delhi on foot, by car, by train or by any conveyance. Similarly when the sadhaka is situated in an elevated position of spirituality, he sees all as one and the same. So, the one Bhagavan is attained by worshipping anyone."

 

But Gita (9.25) says otherwise:

 

yanti deva-vrata devan yanti prtr-vratah

bhutani yanti bhuteya yanti mad yajino 'pi mam

 

"Those who worship the devas attain the planets of the devas, those who worship the forefathers attain the planet of the forefathers and those who worship ghosts attain the ghostly worlds. But those who worsip Me attain Me."

 

And Gita (7.23) says:

 

devan deva-yajo yanti mad bhakta yanti mam api

 

"The worshippers of the devas attain the devas and My devotees attain Me."

 

And concerning that Visnu, Ganesa, Durga, Kali and Siva are all the same, that there is no fundamental or intrinsic difference between them, sruti states:

 

om tad visnoh paramam padam sada

(Rg Veda 1.22.20)

 

"Only Visnu is the Supreme and eternal abode."

 

And Gita (10.12-13) states:

 

param brahma param dhama / pavitram paramam bhavan

purusam sasvatam divyam / adi-devam ajam vibhum

 

ahus tvam rsayah sarve / devarsir naradas tatha

asito devalo vyasah / svayam caiva bravisi me

 

" You are the Supreme Absolute Truth and the Supreme Abode. You are supremely pure, and the destroyer of the impurity of ignorance. The great rsis such as Devarsi Narada, Asita, Devala and Vyasa also glorify You as the eternal Personality, transcendental and primeval Lord, who is unborn and omnipresent. Now You Yourself are saying this to me."

 

So, this 'yata mata tata patha' doctrine as introduced by Ramakrsna, Vivekananda, Aurobindo and others is actually an influence of the British raj and its Christian beliefs, it is non-Vedic at all.

 

dasa dasanudasa

Satyaraja dasa

 

[shvu]

For certain we cannot consider Vivekananda, Ramakrsna, Sivananda and others 'neo-advaitavadis' as pure brahma-vadis or as bona fide followers of Sankaracarya's line.

Yes and No. Depends on how one defines bonafide. RK was initiated by Totapuri who was a Advaita Sanyasi, thus bringing the RK camp under the Advaita fold by virtue of this dikhsa. But on the other hand, they had no traditional training in Vedanta. It was the other way around, with RK and Vivekananda having experiences [if I can use that word], and then discovering that it matched closely with Advaita, among all the existing Vedantic traditions. So while Advaita is a catch_all label for such philosophies, the specific label is Neo-Vedanta.

 

Do you think that many of the misconceptions that are now attributed to Sankaracarya's philosophy is due the misrepresentation that was made by these missions in West?

Possible, perhaps. But the battle against Advaita goes back by 1000 years. Prachanna-Baudham has been an age old allegation. Some scholars have taken the time to study proper sources of Advaita and then find fault with it. Such arguments are serious and reasonable. But some others have taken the shortcut of relying on hearsay and have actually written books based on such hearsay. Some of course, have been plain lies.

 

There is a false story that Madhva met the pontiff of the Sringeri math Vidyasankara, somewhere in Tamil-nadu and they debated for days. Ironically, the outcome of this debate is not known. In those days, the rule of debate was that the loser would change over to the winner's system. Looks like no one won this debate. This story is not known to Advaitins and If I am right, is not accepted by Madhvas either. But such stories can be used to concoct stuff, as has been done by some people in the past.

 

Shankara became some kind of a superman figure. Anyone wanting to start a new Sampradaya had to go against Shankara. There is a common rule that the size of the villain determines the size of the hero. So if someone stands against Shankara, then half his job is done. This is exactly what the later Sampradayas did. In the process, it is quite natural that some false stories and misconceptions would have also been spread around.

 

Anyway, everything is fair in sales and marketing !

 

Cheers

 

------------------

Dear is Plato, but dearer still is Truth - Aristotle