95. ONE HEART, MANY WAYS

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT

95. ONE HEART, MANY WAYS

Humanity is one in its basic urges- its fears and hopes, necessities and needs. Cultural conditioning and exposure to social systems lead to manifold ways of meeting these needs and expressing these hopes and fears. This accounts for the richness of human societies on earth; unfortunately this leads too to much  hatred,strife and violence.

Great thinkers- whom we would call savants- from all lands have always felt this basic unity in their being.They have expressed it in poetry and philosophy. Aldous Huxley brought out an anthology of such thoughts  70 years ago, calling it the Perennial Philosophy. Some may feel that it is after all some religio-mystical stuff. But this is the region where whole truths are perceived.

At the end of the First World War, when The League of Nations was established many people felt happy. But the incredulity and irony of the situation was not lost on some deep thinkers. Writing shortly after, Einstein said:

As late as the 17th century the savants and artists of all Europe were so closely united by the bond of a common ideal that co-operation between them was scarcely affected by political events. This unity was further strengthened by the general use of the Latin language.

Today we look back at this state of affairs as a lost paradise. The passions of nationalism have destroyed this community of the intellect, and the Latin language which united the whole world is dead. The men of learning have become representatives of the most extreme national traditions and lost their sense of an intellectual commonwealth.

Nowadays we are faced with the dismaying fact that the politicians, the practical men of affairs, have become the exponents of international ideas. It is they who have created the League of nations.

Einstein's apprehensions came true. Any agreement among politicians is only a temporary marriage of convenience. The League failed and we had one more World War in 20 years. The second war had introduced the nuclear arms, which began  a competitive race, which has not ended but only intensified with time. U.N Radio interviewed Einstein on June 16, 1950 when he said:

Competitive armament is not a way to prevent war. Everything in this step brings us nearer to catastrophe. The armament race is the worst method to prevent open conflict.....real peace cannot be reached without systematic disarmament on a supranational scale....Arms must be entrusted only to an international authority.

Taken on the whole, I would believe Gandhi's views were the most enlightened of all the political men in our time. We should strive to do things in his spirit....not to use violence in fighting for our cause, but by non-participation in what we believe is evil. 

Quotations taken from: 'My Views', Published by Rupa &co, 1976

How ironical things have turned out to be! There is a clear race for nuclear armaments today. And there is great fear of such armaments finding their way to extremist hands. And Gandhi's own land entered the nuclear arms club! Of course, India was forced to fight in defence, and has never dipped its hand in neighbour's blood any time in history.

It does not mean Indians have not or do not now fight among themselves. Indeed such fighting has only increased after Independence. European nations which were politically divided and antagonistic for centuries have come together, while India which has been one historically is now divided on linguistic lines. Linguistic  loyalties have displaced pan-Indian intellectual affinity. This has pervaded the whole society- from the academies to the street. 

"Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by  narrow domestic walls", sang Tagore. This has come true in a large part of Western Europe; but the poet's own land was divided into two nations at the time of Independence, and subsequently, the whole country has been divided into narrow linguistic walls.

The European Union 

 History forgets some heroes

The partition of India , which killed the ancient unity of our motherland was an act of unpardonable folly. All the Indian leaders lost their head during those last years of the British rule. Surprisingly , the one man who strove to maintain this unity was an Englishman, that too an Imperial guard: Lord Wavell, the second- last Viceroy of India. He was a professional soldier and knew that India had a geographical integrity which should be maintained for its security. He did his best, through two plans and negotiations, to bring the Indian leaders together on some working arrangement. But they failed due to lack of clear thinking on the part of Congress leaders, who were eager for quick power. The course of the talks were tortuous, and it is doubtful if the leaders were at least sincere in their discussions. Unfortunately, Churchill as the British PM was against Hindus and pro-Muslims and he was determined to create Pakistan and encouraged Jinnah. Wavell got a bad name and was summarily replaced by Mountbatten to speed up the process. By this time, Gandhi had been totally sidelined, and between them, Mountbatten, Lady Mountbatten and Nehru sealed the fate of India with Partition.

Our historians have neglected Wavell. He faced very peculiar problems: Britain had ruled India by dividing the people on all conceivable lines: race, religion,caste, community.But Wavell, with his soldier's acumen, realised the importance of a united India  for even the future of the commonwealth .He wanted to avoid partition- a task which involved reversing the British historical role! He could not stall the partition. Unfortunately, the lines of division planted by the British have now grown into mighty trees, with our own leaders adding some of their own, especially language.

The vision of unity does not come to everyone, or easily. I feel Wavell got it from literature! He had been a lover of poetry and could recite thousands of lines from memory! He was persuaded by his son and others to write them down, which were published in a wonderful anthology, titled " Other Men's Flowers". First published in 1944, it is still hugely popular and in print. An anthology reveals the mind and heart of the compiler and here we see Wavell the man. The very first poem is a great gem : The Hound of Heaven by Francis Thompson. The man who begins his anthology with this supremely mystic poem cannot be an ordinary person! Then there is this gem:

SWEET CONTENT by Thomas Dekker (1572-1632)

 Art thou poor, yet has thou golden slumbers?
                    O sweet content!
Art thou rich, yet is thy mind perplex'd?
                    O punishment!
Dost thou laugh to see how fools are vex'd?
To add to golden numbers golden numbers?
 O sweet content! O Sweet, O sweet content!
Work apace, apace, apace, apace;
Honest labour bears a lovely face;
Then hey nonny nonny - hey nonny nonny!

Canst drink the waters of the crisped spring?
               O sweet content!
Swim'st thou in wealth,yet sink'st in thine own tears?
               O punishment!
Then he that patiently want's burden bears,
No burden bears, but is a king, a king!
 O sweet content! O sweet, O sweet content!
Work apace, apace, apace, apace;
Honest labour bears a lovely face;
Then hey nonny, nonny- hey nonny nonny!

What a wonderful poem this is! It recalls to mind Shakespeare's "Under the greenwood tree". And also reminds us of the lines of Goldsmith:

Teach erring man to spurn the rage of gain;
Teach him, that the states of native strength                                                             possess'd
Though very poor, may still be very bless'd.

That an active soldier who rose to become Field Marshal could remember such splendid poems speaks volumes about the man! That he strove to maintain the unity of an ancient land is no wonder! Alas! the world can celebrate only glitter and glamour and cannot recognise pure gold!

As a soldier, he included a number of war poems. But he also knew that "while love poems are written by those who have been in love, battle poems are seldom  written by those who have been in battle".He said that " A poet is a man  to whom vision is given beyond his fellows." and that "without vision...the people perish". It is one of the quirks of history that a Viceroy with a vision to maintain unity failed, and a people with leaders lacking vision, succeeded in dividing this ancient land!

 

Wavell , at his desk in Delhi during World War II
Photo by Cecil Beaton. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.

.LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT. 89. LEARNING FROM THE MOVIES

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT

89. LEARNING FROM THE MOVIES

Well, popular novels and stories are made into films,with varying results. But does any movie make us turn to the books and stories?

A successful movie with an interesting story may induce us to take up the book. But any good depiction of a literary theme may rekindle interest in old literature.

One such movie I remember is Renaissance Man ( also called Army Intelligence somewhere).1994.

Theatrical Release poster. Used here for illustration .

 Bill Rago, a senior advertisement executive runs out of business. Not wishing to remain idle, he secures temporary employment as an  instructor in an army training school, teaching a bunch of good-for- nothing nuts English language and comprehension! These trainees are considered low on intelligence, not at all interested , and it is doubtful how literate they are!

Struggling to connect with them and arouse their interest, he quotes from Hamlet, his favourite Shakespearean play, to not much effect. In a brilliant flash, he assigns to each cadet  a character in the play and makes him read the lines! This sparks some interest. He takes them to live performances. He even talks to them about Henry V.

He has only 6 weeks on his assignment, but sets up a test at the end of it, against the 'wiser' counsel of the establishment, which doubts that any one would pass.

Then one day, the drill master provokes a trainee in front of every one; this cadet in full uniform and pouring rain, surprises everyone by reciting  in full the St.Crispin's Day speech from Shakespeare's play,Henry V! The cadets all pass the test brilliantly.

Rago receives a salute from the soldiers on graduation day. He decides to remain a teacher in the army school!

St.Crispin's Day Speech

This is one of the most famous speeches from Shakespeare. The English are fighting the French. Duke of Westmorland, one of the military advisers doubts the capacity of the English soldiers, and wishes there had been ten thousand more.  King Henry V  disagrees, and makes this speech to his troops, to inspire them. It is a long one, but worth reading in full.

Westmoreland

Oh, that we now had here

One ten thousand of those men in England

That do no work today.

King Henry

What's he that wishes so?

My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin.

If we are marked to die, we are enough 

To do our country loss; and if to live

The fewer men, the greater share of honour.

God's will, I pray thee wish not one more man.

By Jove, I am not covetous for gold

Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;

It yearns me not if men my garments wear;

Such outward things dwell not in my desires.

But if it be a sin to covet honour,

I am the most offending soul alive.

No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.

God's peace, I would not lose so great an honour

As one more man, methinks, would share from me,

For the best hope I have. Oh, do not wish one more.

Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,

That he, which hath no stomach to this fight,

Let him depart. His passport shall be made,

And crowns for convoy put into his purse.

We would not die in that man's company

That fears his fellowship to die with us.

This day is called feast of  Crispian.

He that outlives this day and comes safe home,

Will stand o' tiptoe when the day is named

And rouse him at the name of Crispian.

He that shall see this day, and live old age,

Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours

And say, "Tomorrow is Saint Crispian".

Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,

And say, "These wounds I had on Crispin's Day".

Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot

But he'll remember with advantages

What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,

Familiar in his mouth as household words,

Harry the King, Bedford, and Exeter,

Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,

Be in their flowing cups freshly remembered.

This story shall the good man teach his son,

And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by

From this day to the ending of the world

But we in it shall be remembered-

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

For he today that sheds his blood with me

Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,

This day shall gentle his condition;

And gentlemen in England now abed

Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,

And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks

That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

From: Henry V, Act  IV, Scene,iii., lines 17-69

If a dull cadet could learn this by heart without compulsion, just on the inspiration of the teacher, what must be the calibre of the teacher?  How grand that   that a cine-screen writer could think of such a situation! What must be the general level of education of the audience to be able to hear such literary recital in a mainline movie! Do we not honour Shakespeare enough, if only we listen, unable to learn it by heart? Is there any other easy way of honouring our greats?

(Note: I  reproduced this speech in full on purpose. There is one Tamil drama called "Manonmaneeyam" by one P. Sundaram Pillai, written a century ago. It is praised as a high work. In that too occurs a speech on the war front. Those who read this speech of King Henry will easily recognise the Tamil work as having borrowed from this heavily- without acknowledgement!)

How to teach-  Language,Literature, Music, anything!

This movie also illustrates a great secret about teaching. Teaching  language typically starts with the alphabets. They begin music with the notes- sa, re, ga, ma, etc. This has seemed to me to be the most  Idiotic way of going about the business. Do children pick up speaking by learning the alphabets? do they pick up the jingles and rhymes on the TV by learning the swaras? When they like a song, do they not learn it on their own? The way to teach is to make the person interested in the thing. He will then learn on his own! He will himself seek resolution of the difficulties he faces. Of course, all of us are not interested in all the things. Any subject can be a vehicle of promoting knowledge and intelligence. We make youngsters dull by teaching them too many subjects and testing them in things they don't like- and they probably don't need in, or for, life! 

Language teaching should begin with literature; music teaching should begin with good songs. In the olden days, most learned people were illiterate! They had scribes to record what they had to say! Even today, how many children can tell stories on their own! Sing on their own! What have alphabets and notations to do with learning, really? They may come later, not in the beginning. 

Above all, real teaching is not teaching a subject. It is about making a man- or woman! This is what we see here, in 'Renaissance Man'. This is what we saw in 'To Sir, With Love.' There , the teacher tells the boys and girls, all unruly, that since in a few months they are going to enter the world, he would treat them as adults right then! With that stroke , he has imparted them the most important lesson in the school of life: responsibility for the self!

Who is a teacher?

The academic world runs on formal qualifications for teachers-  B.Ed. M.Phil, PhD,and what not. We see that once a qualification is formally prescribed, it is obtained as a routine. Yet, how may of these degree holders can really teach?

This is another lesson 'Renaissance Man' teaches. Bill Rago is not qualified as a teacher. But he makes military cadets appreciate and read Shakespeare! In the movie, he talks on Hamlet. They were sparkling. Of course, it was the work of the screen writer- but he too was not a professional teacher!  And he must really have studied Hamlet and 'seen' something in it! (Unfortunately, I have not been able get those beautiful lines.) Teaching is a great art- and it comes to some, naturally! Likewise, in 'To Sir', the 'Sir' is an engineer,out of employment and he teaches unruly boys and turns them into adults. He succeeded, where professional teachers before him failed! It shows he was a natural teacher.

Natural teachers don't - don't have to- teach formally. For them, any situation can be made a teaching/ learning situation. Most of us have learned- imbibed- many things from parents, peers, friends. For good or bad they have all been our teachers.Teaching does not always, or all of it, take place in the confines of the class room.Nor does learning occur there, necessarily.



There are two aspects even to formal teaching. One is to convey something- formal knowledge, organised information etc. The second is to ignite the spark in the student. The first is instruction, the second is teaching proper. Most formal teaching is mere instruction, not very lively or interesting. This is what makes most students skip classes, or teachers. This is what makes subjects dull. It is found that this takes place even in some famed institutions. Recently Harvard created a scandal by clandestinely monitoring students who skipped classes!

Instruction is important too. It conveys basic information and essential knowledge, especially at the lower stages. But higher learning is possible only when the mind of the student is lit up- his soul has to be touched by something more than information. Consciously or other wise great teachers carry some spiritual weight or authority. They connect us with something other than the ordinary- a higher or deeper dimension of life . Real teaching is to make the student touch or connect with his self. He experiences himself anew. This is what Rago does. The actor seems to be living his role. There is nothing filmy about it.

Critics are crooks

I was sad to know that this movie did not receive favourable reviews. The critics have crooked vision, if at all. They ask : how is Shakespeare relevant to the military trainees? Well, how is Shakespeare or Milton or Wordsworth or even Obama relevant to us? Life will go on with or without them! But what kind of life? A literary genius is the fruit of a living culture, and they are the light of the future. They nourish the mind and soul. Politicians press the people for military service and one day the whole thing looks absurd,and sad. A soldier will get discharged one day- all his military  training and combat skill useless in the battle of life. This is where Shakespeare is more relevant. He will make the man in the soldier realise that in the great drama of life, one of his roles has ended, and another begun!

The critic raises this question because he is connected to the medium and has missed its message. He is evaluating the movie as movie, and is not connecting it to life. I would even question whether he is connected to life,either!


It is difficult to say by what standards do the critics judge. I am reminded of what Alexander Pope wrote in " An Essay on Criticism".(1711)

'Tis hard to say, if greater want of skill
Appear in writing or in judging ill;
But, of the two, less dang'rous is th' offence
To tire our patience, than mislead our sense.

Ten censure wrong for one who writes amiss;

In Poets as true genius is but rare,
True Taste as seldom is the critic's share;

Let such teach others who themselves excel,
And censure freely who have written well.
Authors are partial to their wit,'tis true,
But are not Critics to their judgment too?

Alexander Pope.
Michael Dahl [Public Domain] via Wikimedia Commons.

The movie may not meet all  standards of technical excellence,as movies go,  but it is not as bad as some critics may say and thus 'mislead our sense'. The normal viewer does not go to judge its technicalities, but to view and enjoy the story and its development, as delineated by the artists. The problem  for Rago is want of a job; the problem with the cadets is their inability and unwillingness to learn.Rago solves the cadets' problem, making them all interested in learning, and he himself settles down to teach in the military school. Thus the dull cadets become eager learners; a business executive is transformed into a teacher; and both events occur due to the human spirit, not due to  any executive strategy or the rigid military discipline. Is this not a great message for humanity? If a critic cannot appreciate this, is he human?  

I don't go by the logic of the box office. Sometimes, significant events get overshadowed by more glamorous ones. Aldous Huxley died on the same day as John Kennedy. Kennedy event hogged all attention. But in the long run, what did Kennedy contribute to humanity, compared to Huxley?

Aldous Huxley. Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons



Renaissance Man can only be watched as  a movie- it is on the You Tube. 

LITERATURE-LIGHT AND DELIGHT. 44. RELIGIOUS BIOGRAPHIES: SRI RAMAKRISHNA

LITERATURE- LIGHT AND DELIGHT

44. RELIGIOUS BIOGRAPHIES :SRI RAMAKRISHNA

Biographies have been a popular form of literature, though few of them are regarded as truthful. Boswell's  'Life of Johnson' has perhaps been the most popular biography in English. Biographies of leaders or famous people tend to be written either by admirers or critics, and we do not know where the truth lies. Early biographies of modern leaders like John Kennedy look foolish in the light of subsequent revelations thrown up by research. Abraham Lincoln on the other hand seems to grow in stature with the passing years. There is something remarkable about this great man and great President. Plutarch's biography of the  greats of ancient Greece and Rome has been famous and a source of inspiration for many.

We in India are used to biographies of religious figures- called hagiography. Obviously they are written by admirers, and the modern tendency is to look upon them as uncritical and unhistorical, even fanciful. They praise the subjects too much. Periyapuranam in Tamil, Mahabhakta Vijayam in Marathi, and Sankaravijayam in Sanskrit are perhaps the three we in the South are familiar with. Mahabhakta Vijayam in Tamil translations is also popular among Tamil devotees, and whatever the historical veracity, its capacity to inspire and edify is beyond doubt. While the Vedantins go about arguing, the devotees are busy learning about the lives of the Saints. It is any body's guess whether the former get wiser, and the latter, saintly! 

What puts off modern readers is the accounts of miracles these accounts contain. Many of them are quite absurd, and unnecessary. It however does not mean that no miracle has ever taken place, or they have ceased to occur.

We have biographies of three modern Saints and Sages which are entirely credible: Sri Ramakrishna, Ramana Maharshi and Sri Aurobindo. They lived in modern times, were subjected to critical scrutiny in their own time and subsequently. They have their own detractors but the main events of their lives have been shown to be authentic.

Sri Ramakrishna was born in a Bengal village in 1836, to poor but pious parents. He was intelligent, but was not interested in a 'bread winning education'. He came to Calcutta in 1855 to assist his elder brother who ran a Sanskrit school but soon came to the Kali temple at Dakshineswar newly established there by Rani Rasmani, to be with his brother who became a priest there. Subsequently, he himself became a priest ( though he hated priesthood in a temple). Thus began his life of Sadhana, full of the mystical element. He had little control on himself in religious matters- it was as if he was being carried by a current, and he had no interest in worldly affairs.His life was open, he had no privacy, and he was entirely at the mercy of others. In many respects his behaviour was unconventional , but somehow everyone tolerated him! Some remarkable religious characters of different persuasions came to him to impart their wisdom. In the meantime, people thought he was mad and felt it could be cured if he got married. So, at the age of 23 he was married to a village girl of 6, but came back to Calcutta to continue his Sadhana. His sadhana was over by 1872 but he continued  to live in the temple complex, till September, 1885 when he had to shift to Calcutta for his medical treatment and he passed away on the night of 15 August,1886.

From 1872, news about him had spread by word of mouth and mainly educated people started coming to him , just to listen to him talk about God- the only subject he talked about! By then young educated Bengal was attracted towards the reformist Brahmo Samaj. But once their leader Keshab Chandra Sen came into contact with Sri Ramakrishna and started speaking and writing about him, he became well known in their circles. But his saintly life and wisdom seem to have touched even some Englishmen, and it is from one such that Vivekananda heard about him first in 1881. 

On a Sunday in Feb.1882, a 28-year old school teacher casually strolled into the temple complex and happened to meet Sri Ramakrishna. He was so impressed that he started visiting on subsequent Sundays and holidays. He was in the habit of writing diary from his school days, and so kept notes of his visits- recording who were all there, what happened, what was discussed, etc. He could visit only on Sundays and holidays because of his work but he noted down all that he saw and heard first hand. The notes were meant for his personal use and he consistently refused to share them with others.  He used to read the notes and meditate on the scenes. After the passing of the Master, he happened to read out some of the contents to Vivekananda and Holy Mother, who were simply thrilled. Swami Vivekananda was observing silence on that day but he wrote:

Thanks 100000. Master! You have hit Ramakristo in the right point.

Holy Mother wrote:

...the words of Thakur, which he has instructed you to preserve....you must preserve carefully. 

Whatever you had heard from Him is nothing but the Truth.

Know it for certain that unless those words are brought out, man will not have his consciousness awakened.

One day when you read them out to me, I felt it was He who was speaking.

Thus did Sri Mahendranath Gupta- that was the name of the school teacher- start writing. He simply called himself "M". He first wrote some translations in English in magazines, and then issued some pamphlets in late 1897- 11 years after the demise of Sri Ramakrishna. Once again Swami Vivekananda was ecstatic. He wrote:

C'est bon, mon ami- now you are doing just the thing. Come out man, no sleeping all life; ...Bravo! That is the way.

Many, many thanks for your second leaflet. It is indeed wonderful. The move is quite original, and never was the life of a great teacher  brought before the public untarnished by the writer's mind, as you are doing.

I now understand why none of us attempted his life before. It has been reserved for you, this great work. He is with you evidently.

P.S. The Socratic dialogues are Plato all over; you are entirely hidden.

Some Bengali devotees who had been present at some of these talks felt that it would be better if he wrote in Bengali, capturing the original words of Sri Ramakrishna. So, he contributed portions which appeared in some 18 Bengali periodicals. The final name Sri Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrita was chosen in January,1899.

There had been suggestions that instead of leaflets and articles, it should appear in a book form. So, he brought out the first volume of the Kathamrita in Bengali in March, 1902, on the birthday of Sri Ramakrishna, dedicating it to the Holy Mother. The last volume-Vol.5 was published in 1932. In fact, M corrected the proof sheets of the last form of the last volume on the night of June, 3 and passed away thereafter!

Thus, the Kathamrita was not written in a hurry or for any commercial motive or for fame. Sri M- he was called Master Mahashay later- lived with it. He has described how he wrote the Kathamrita from his notes:

....I didn't note them [ the words of Thakur] down at the spot. I wrote everything from memory after I returned home. Sometimes I had to keep awake the whole night. What I have presented here is not collected from others. Only what I have seen of the divine play of Thakur with my own eyes  and heard with my own ears from His holy mouth has been narrated. I have not collected as the antiquarians do. Only what I myself heard from Thakur's holy mouth or saw with my own eyes I recorded.

 I would carry the nectar-like words of Thakur in my memory and would record them briefly in the  diary on reaching home. The book written out from these notes appeared much later. On every scene I had meditated a thousand times.Therefore I could recreate, relive those moments by Thakur's grace.When I did not feel satisfied with my descriptions I would plunge myself into meditation on Thakur. Then the correct image would rise before my mind's eye in a bright, real living form.

The title "Kathamrita " is a very happy choice. It is first used by the greatest of Lord Krishna's devotees, the Gopis of Brindavan, who sing:

Thava kathamritam tapta jeevanam
Kavi bhireeditam kalmashapaham
Sravana mangalam Srimadatatam
Bhuvi grunantite bhurida janaa:

The nectar of your story confers life on people ( freeing them from the three kinds of afflictions: Adyatmikam, Adhibaudhikam, Adidaivikam); it is celebrated by the great Kavis (Jnanis); removes our sins; it is sweet to listen to and confers auspiciousness; it is very soothing too, and widespread. Those who recite this are the fortunate on this earth. ( Or they are the munificent.)

Srimad Bhagavatam. 10-31-14

This shows how deeply immersed M was in our Bhagavata lore.



The non-Bengali world had to wait another 10 years before the first complete English translation appeared in 1942, under the title " The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna". Gospel means 'the good news or word' and in that sense conveys the gist of the Bhagavata sloka. Aldous Huxley in his foreword states:

"M" produced a book unique, so far as my knowledge goes, in the literature of hagiography. No other saint has had so able and indefatigable a Boswell. Never have the small events of a contemplatives daily life been described with such a wealth of intimate detail. Never have the casual and unstudied utterances of a great religious teacher been set down with so minute a fidelity.

In fact, the Gospel takes us to the Gita. There, when Lord Krishna tells Arjuna of the sthitaprajna, Arjuna asks:

Sthitaprajnasya kaa bhaashaa 
Samadistasya Keshava
Sthita dhee: kim prabhashaeta
Kim aaseeta vrajet kim.               2.54

O Keshava, what is the description of the stithaprajna- the man of steady wisdom, merged in Samadhi? How does he speak, how does he sit, how does he walk?

Sri Krishna answers him in the next 18 slokas. The question may appear silly to superficial observers, but the men of steady wisdom are at a totally different level of consciousness, and it is a wonder that they are able to manage to live in the world at all. M's Gospel is indeed a detailed commentary on this; we see Sri Ramakrishna in Samadhi, totally unaware of the external world; then we watch him as he regains normal consciousness and starts dealing with his environment. At other times we watch him behaving like a village simpleton,with rustic wisdom but no sophistication.This is something we can believe only when we behold!

No two sages or saints are alike. Even a disciple cannot be like his master. No two disciples of Sri Ramakrishna were alike. But M was unique among them all. I have read over 100 books on the lives of saints of all religions and sects, over the last 40 years, but there is none like The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. Going through this is a complete education by itself.We feel are in the presence of Sri Ramakrishna and things are happening in our very presence. Such is the power of the writing. There has been only one Vyasa; there will be only one M. None interested in our religion, culture and philosophy can afford to miss this.


Note:

1.I am talking of just The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna- the book. I am not endorsing the organisations that bear the name of Sri Ramakrishna. These were created after the lifetime of Sri Ramakrishna. I also believe that they are not faithful to his views in all respects. The RK Mission once went to the Supreme Court, declaring that Sri Ramakrishna was NOT a Hindu and that the order should be declared minority institution, as it represented 'Ramakrishnaism'!  ( All because they wanted to run some educational institutions.) Absurdity cannot scale greater heights! Being a follower or devotee of Sri Ramakrishna does not mean we have to follow or support these institutions!

2. Over the years, the RK Math has published many books on our religion-  translations and commentaries on the Upanishads, Gita etc. For many years these were the only decent translations available. There have been great scholars among the early monks, but most of them have their own 'kinks'.

3. The RK order claims to be Advaitins in the Sankara mould, based on the fact that Sri Ramakrishna's guru on Vedanta was Tota Puri, a monk belonging to the 'Puri' order- one of the 'Dasanami' orders founded or regularised by Sankara. But Sri Ramakrishna had other gurus too, in other areas- like Bhairavi Brahmani for Tantra. Ramakrishna was unique- it is impossible to label and confine him. He believed in Vedanta-Advaita, but not necessarily of the Sankara brand. He asked why the world should be considered 'maya'; he believed in both 'nitya' and 'lila'. In bhakti, he was more akin to Chaitanya than Sankara. His general prescription for our age was 'the way of devotion as advocated by Narada'. He held that the path of Karma (Vedic rituals) or of Jnana was not suitable for our age. ( He said that Jnana cannot be followed by people with body consciousness and in this age, this consciousness cannot be given up as the body depends on food.) There are many fine points like this in his life which we can discern from the Gospel. We should read the Gospel ourselves and not go by other's opinion.

4. I do not know about translations of the Gospel into other languages, but I am not happy about the current Tamil translation. It is better for people who come from a general religious or Astika background to read the English  version, which is splendid. ( I have all the Tamil translations that have been available since the mid-50s.)

5. Sri Mahendranath Gupta, the author of the Gospel is a great person, who spent all his time only in living and spreading the teaching of the Gospel. He wanted to take up Sanyas, but Sri Ramakrishna did not permit him. But in austerity, tapas and devotion, he was second to none. The Gospel is the greatest monument to the life and memory of Sri Ramakrishna. This is the greatest benefit M has conferred on the world.

6. Over the years many books have appeared on the life and teachings of Sri Ramakrishna, but none of them comes any where near the Gospel and all of them have drwan heavily from it. The life of a holy man is not easy to chronicle or interpret. Luckily, Sri Ramakrishna himself revealed many details of his early life in the village, his parents, his life and Sadhana in Dakshineswar, and the personalities who came into contact with him. More than 20 years after the Master's passing, Swami Saradananda, a direct disciple who had spent time with the Master, collected more information and wrote a detailed biography in Bengali in a magazine from 1909, under the title "Sri Ramakrishna Lilaprasanga" but he discontinued it in 1919 for want of inspiration, as he said, without covering the last phase of the Master's life in Calcutta and his demise. This is not a mere biography, but contains the Swami's own interpretations and comments. This was later translated into English but it is dense. Recently (2003) a new translation has been done by Swami Chetanananda, which is delightful to read. Even so, I feel for earnest devotees, The Gospel alone will suffice. The Master himself revealed all that we need to know. Why break our heads with more details? Why be more loyal than the king?

7. Reverential reading of The Gospel is a moving experience, besides being a pleasant spiritual practice. Gurudev Tagore wrote about " Where words come out from the depth of Truth". We can experience this as we read the Gospel. It is said that after Lord Krishna left the earth, Bhagavatam stands as the personification of the Lord. The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna does indeed stand for the Master. What the Gopis sang of Lord Krishna is what M has written about Sri Ramakrishna! They are Blessed, and blessed indeed are those who recite or read them!