This fellow should have read "Complete works of Swami Vivekananda".
It was true that Vivekananda was not fanatic and he was original and daring in his views.
Not with any prejudice to his benevolent views on Islam, I would like to say, he criticized Hadith and Mohammed the prophet. He criticized the concept of heaven as reward as described by all non-vedic religions (including Christianity ) as useless, an imaginative creation of human mind, right in his Chicago lecture,by emphasizing karma,rebirth, and final merger in to God (moksha or liberation) and strongly defended idol worship, raw and crude Hinduism without adulterating it with so called "modernism".
One should better read it than to expect me to write any thing here. He also described as Islam ( in its practice) much nearer to a cult rather than a full fledged religion and you and I may or may not agree, that is a different issue.
Some of his original and very interesting lectures are about Advaita, Buddhism, conversions by Missionaries, Strength of Hinduism, Bhagavad-Gita, Power of Mind and My Master.
For example speaking about Advaita , he proved through logical argument that Advaitha and Dvaitha are one and same. But if you read Ramakrishna Paramahamsa's "kathamritha (Gospel)" you would find that Ramakrishna already said this in simple words,without logic but with small stories. It is because of space problems I cannot write here, all that story but as most western scholars already said, we can again say that, Vivekananda mostly, elucidated what was already told by his Master. He was like St.Peter to Jesus Christ.
Only difference is that whatever his great Master had spoken was recorded by Mahashaya ( "M".Gupta) and others while everything Jesus said was not recorded , instead,they recorded what they liked !!! some of it probably , out of context.
Vivekananda also spoke about reconverting people, dimnishing Hindu populations because of conversions, criticized Brahmins, supported idol worship, criticized untouchability and typical Indian mentality of pulling each others legs(discouraging a new point of view, merit, scholarship etc., ) .
So, giving an impression that he was all praise for Islam and "modern" with secularism etc., is all foolish. I admire Vivekananda , I read his complete works and except last part I read voluminous Kathamritha in detail. I think some one should read Arunshouri's article on Vivekananda's praise as well as criticism of Islam.
>> "Guess the great Indian nation of Swami Vivekand is handicapped as some parts of body ran away. Of course without brain to Pakistan. " - Jackass
Absolutely brilliant!! LOL
Vivekanand's idealism is too tempting but it is anochranistic is contemporary times. His harmonizing and conjuctions might have been read as something new 100 years back but today it seems like a pinko's sob story. The idea of democracy is to give way to secular authority over the religious authority. Though religion still plays its part in a democracy, the secular authority supercedes the traditional authority.
Vedanta Brain and Islam Body is the only hope.
Guess the great Indian nation of Swami Vivekand is handicapped as some parts of body ran away. Of course without brain to Pakistan.
Normally the body follows the brain.
"I was somewhat disappointed to see the Times of India carrying tributes to Vivekanand written by two RSS pracharaks, Narendra Modi and Tarun Vijay."
Yeah! Only seculars have the first right to write on Vivekanada...
It is good to see some Muslim websites publish Prarap Bhanu Mehta's article on Vivekananda.
Here is one more pracharak who has READ Vivekananda and quotes from his books......
Religion is not to dictate how the society should live.. In modern society there is separation of religion and state.. VIvekananda's thinking was for the society 100/150 years back. Mixing up religion and societial behaviour will confuse eveybody.. It makes society rigid and resistant to any changes. and it will also confuse true seekers who try to get answers regarding God/meaning of life from religion.. Today we have UN charter on Human rights for society.. Thats better than most of the other things religionists propose.
>> I am sure that is true.
Then what does it say about MP govt's decision to teach it in schools?
>> He (Vivekananda) also understood Gita lot better than .... Desai.
I am sure that is true. Even you know that.
"Vivekanand (and Pratap Bhanu Mehta) understood that equality and justice were central to Islam better than most of our mullahs and jehadis. "
He also understood Gita lot better than ignorants like Desai.
>> "The legitimacy of the Indian enterprise would forever be measured by the fact that it was tethered to values: a theological openness, toleration in the highest sense of the term and pluralism. ..... The distinction of Indian nationalism was precisely that it never saw the nation as the highest embodiment of value."
Vivekanand was way ahead of his times. He can truly be called the first Indian modernist.
>> "And “if any religion approached equality in any appreciable manner it was Islam and Islam alone.” The reference to Islamic body is not to an ideal of power; it is to the central idea of equality."
Vivekanand (and Pratap Bhanu Mehta) understood that equality and justice were central to Islam better than most of our mullahs and jehadis. Similarly Vivekanands belief that humanity needs wider circles of identification to transcend narrow identities is a message that both Hindus and Muslims still need to learn.
Yes Mr. Nagaraj, we all know you have much "deeper insight" than Swamy Vivekananda.
Swami Vivekananda must have been totally unhappy with the caste heirarchy in Bengal of those days,as also in Kerala at that time.In relative terms congregational prayers by Muslims has impressed him.Swami's statement that if any religion approached equality in any appreciable manner it was Islam and Islam alone misses deeper insight into the practices of that soceity.Why do Sunnis and Shias eternally fight each other?Why are women forced into purdhas and not allowed to pray at mosques? And how is that there are OBCs amongst Muslims? The great man that Swami Vivekananda was,he seems to have been highly disgusted with the rigid caste systems in the Hindu soceity of those days,immersed as they were more in rituals than imbibing the spirit of Vedantic Hinduism.
It doesn't take much for Indian self claimed ‘liberals’ to show their fascist streak. If they had their way, they would ban RSS pracharaks from talking about Vivekananda, someone the seculars themselves discovered recently.
>> I was somewhat disappointed to see the Times of India carrying tributes to Vivekanand written by two RSS pracharaks, Narendra Modi and Tarun Vijay.
Oh! That's so bad.
According to "liberals" and stuck pigs, RSS pracharaks should restrict themselves to Hedgewar, Golwalkar, Deen Dayal Upadhayay etc. Heaven forbid they say anything nice against Gandhi/Patel/Vivekananda etc.
Liberals, jehadis and dynasty boot lickers should not only have the first claim on talking about them, but the only claim. BJP/RSS/VHP/BD/Durga Vahini must all be banned. All copies of Gita must be burned, since it promotes holocast, and Sharia law and Islamic banking should replace secular law and banking. That would make Indian society liberal.
Excellent Article. A must read.
Excellent article. It is good to see Vivekananda's birthday being comemorated by a broadminded secularist writer such as Pratap Bhanu Mehta. I was somewhat disappointed to see the Times of India carrying tributes to Vivekanand written by two RSS pracharaks, Narendra Modi and Tarun Vijay.