Swami Vivekananda

Cape Comorin, or Kanyakamuri, stands at the very bottom of the Indian subcontinent mainland. Like other geographical extremities around the world, it inspires curiosity and the imagination, and thousands of tourists, largely domestic but also international, arrive daily. In addition to the (Hindu) temple at the tip of the mainland, however, there is an even more prominent monument offshore, to Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902), and it is on him I wanted to reflect in today’s entry.

Vivekananda was born to a family in Calcutta and, after some studies in law, joined a famous spiritual leader, Swami Ramakrishna, at his monastery in Calcutta. At the end of two years as an itinerant monk (or sannyasin), Vivekananda, with fame and funds he gathered from his preachings around India, made a trip to Chicago to take part in the Parliament of Religions held in September 1893 after the World’s Columbian Exposition. [It is not entirely clear where he got the idea to attend.] Vivekananda, although uninvited and unplanned (there were other more “official” representatives of Hinduism present), was a great success and achieved critical and popular success (including among some of America’s moneyed elite, it seems). With his success in the New World (as well as later in Europe), he returned to India a great hero and founded the Ramakrishna Mission in Calcutta, which is devoted to carrying out his and his predecessor’s spiritual vision.

What is that vision? My knowledge on this is of course very limited, but from the materials I have read it seemed that the principal idea is that all religions are one, and lead to the same God. More practically, his greatest focuses were 1) transforming the mission of Hindu monastics from a purely personal/spiritual one to a public one, not only to teach on spiritual matters but to have a positive effect on people’s material well-being through education, etc., 2) fighting inequality generally, including inequality resulting from the Hindu caste system and 3) drawing the world’s attention to poverty and other problems in India.

I chose to write on Vivekananda not only because he has been influential in twentieth century Indian history (many of India’s greatest leaders were/are admirers of him), but because of the unusual Chicago/Columbian Exposition connection. I’ve always been interested in that fair, which took place in a town I grew up in. Vivekananda, by attending (and achieving renown at) a forum half a world away, was able to enhance his reputation back home–a not uncommon phenomenon, and one which shows the connectedness of the world. I am not a spiritual person, but I thought I would reflect on some quotations that I found personally of interest.

“Each nation, like each individual, has one theme in this life, which is its center, the principal note with which every other note mingles to form the harmony. If any nation attempts to throw off its national vitality, the direction which has become its own through the transmission of centuries, that nation dies. In India religious life forms the center, the keynote of the whole music of national life. Social reform has to be preached in India by showing how much more spiritual a life the new system will bring, and politics has to be preached by showing how much it will improve the one thing that the nation wants–its spirituality.”

I chose this because it speaks to Vivekananda’s pragmatism. In this passage, Vivekananda speaks of religion as a means to the end of social reform, though I do not doubt that Vivekananda saw religion as more than just a means to a social end. I often wonder who will be the first great American politician of the 21st century to argue effectively that social justice is an end that is demanded by Christian religious beliefs, and thereby convince more religious Americans leftward, away from their selfish, hypocritical neighbors.

This quotation bothers me, though, because it uses the cultural conservatism / moral decline sort of language used by the U.S. right wing. On religion or cultural issues (e.g., gay marriage), the argument would go that x has been with us hundreds of years, and therefore our society may fall apart without x. Or conservatives would similarly argue that the free market is essential to America and its prosperity (perhaps a better argument than for religion, since religion does not dominate life in the U.S. as it arguably does in India). [Of course, the left could make similar arguments about individual liberty and immigration.] Are not more revolutionary acts possible? Can a person or a country not reform itself? If this is indeed a truism for individuals, which Vivekananda takes as given, what is my theme in life? Am I old enough now that there should be a pattern that I should seek to follow through?

“The history of the world is the history of a few men who had faith in themselves. That faith calls out the divinity within. You fail only when you do not strive sufficiently to manifest infinite power. As soon as a man loses faith in himself, death comes. Believe first in yourself, and then in God.”

Of course, I like the fundamentally humanist tone of this passage. But I also liked this quotation because it reminded me of Descartes and other theories of consciousness I half recall. The question this passage answers, to me, is how to conceptualize being and consciousness in a way that is productive for man. Vivekananda speaks of consciousness as “the divinity within.” We all begin our lives as a set of possibilities, and then actualize a certain subset of those possibilities. By calling the total set of possibilities, our potential, “divine,” Vivekananda argues that what we are able to achieve (our maximum potential) is limitless (drawing from “infinite power”), and urges us to push aside our preconceived limits (borne of uncertainty or fear). That which you do not attempt you will never achieve, and you are able to achieve more than you think you can.

“If you seek your own salvation, you will go to hell. It is the salvation of others that you must seek; and even if you have to go to hell in working for others, that is worth more than to gain heaven by seeking our own salvation.”

I’m not sure about the logic of this passage as a whole, but I feel that it draws attention to the deficiency of a principal message of many religions. Simply put: Why is spirituality sometimes so selfish? Isn’t helping others an ultimate good, and shouldn’t it come ahead of so many of the (other) rules that religions impose? We all need to be reminded that helping others is one of few absolute goods in life, true without regard to anything else, and most other things secondary.

“My ideal indeed can be put into a few words, and that is: to preach unto mankind their divinity, and how to make it manifest in every movement of life.”

Not only carpe diem, but genuinely think about each action you’re taking, to check that it conforms to what you want to achieve in life and your moral guidelines. Be purposeful.