Vivekananda etc.

[Bijoy Misra]

Let's not get offtrack.  What I said that here we are
not evaluating personalities, but the views, that too
regarding Indo-Aryans.  Let's see if we can achieve
results with calmness..  I agree Vivekananda can
be provocative, probably he was..  We should not.


On Wed, 18 Mar 1998, Robert J. Zydenbos wrote:

> Bijoy Misra wrote (about Vivekananda, in response to me):
>
> > It's useful in a debate to comment on a person's work rather
> > than the person himself/herself.
>
> I'm going through his writings right now, but you will have to wait
> till my written report is ready for presentation. Till then, I'm
> only offering you these few of my preliminary conclusions (which
> surely will remain among the concluding). Then you will have the
> quotes, references to page numbers in his writings, etc.
>
> > I thought strong language against Swami Vivekananda
> > is not necessary to make a point in this forum.
>
> If you had followed the thread, you would have seen that the
> previous poster, to whom I referred, had mentioned low esteem of V.
> as an example of "nonsense" among Western scholars. The few
> characterisations I gave of V. (admittedly provocative: I had to be
> clear in a few words; and at times I like bating the ill-informed
> to expose themselves and making the list more lively) seem quite
> uncontrovertible.
>
> > For many people
> > in the world (including me!) he was a genius ..
>
> A (healthy) point that is regularly made here on INDOLOGY is that
> freedom of thought and expression (including criticism, debunking
> of myths and personal glorification, etc.) is good. And
> irrespective of whoever's personal sentiments, I demand such rights
> when I speak / write of a wild demagogue like Vivekananda.
>
> (Do you think you could explain, in objective terms which stand to
> reason, in the light of the history of Indian thought and of
> comparative religion and philosophy, why V. was a 'genius'? I have
> not yet found anyone who can, so I am curious.)
>
> RZ
>