RAMAKRISHNA : THE ETERNAL FLAME

Today, on the 178th Birth Anniversary of Sri RamaKrishna, I had shared a post on him by my learned friend Amitava Chatterjee - he has rightfully discussed the relevance of the great man's teachings against the backdrop of today - contemporary times. It is impossible even for the audaciously loud and nosy parker that I am (with my irritating, 'omni-pervasive' nose in every possible pie around) to script an essay on RamaKrishna. 

I'm not mentioning the headlines of today's newspaper but I guess in troubled times like ours, it is important to look, feel and learn with the correct perspective, and Ramakrishna's teachings are amongst the best to refer to while one does that. A couple of points come to my mind though, which makes the philosopher yet more nobly unique. As I think deeper, I remember how I, as a 4 year old child, had reacted to the element of Ramkrishna's presence in the adult world - that at home and outside, while as years passed by and I grew up hopping up school classes. I guess I can analyze why he was a always comfortable presence in the princedom of my consciousness.  

RamaKrishna is perhaps the only divine philosopher who neither needed any practical institutionalized support, nor did he end up summarized in any block of man's sectarian Religiosity. In fact his philosophy prompted the birth of an institution that fulfills social duties and has spread its global embrace over time. 
Man tends to associate anything spiritual with personalized divinity. A particular occidental, and rather popular perspective that grossly looks upon RamaKrishna as a Hindu saint or preacher is an immense misperception. It is here I think it reveals the theocentricity of man's restrictive spiritual character.  


The beauty of his philosophy in this context is successfully visible in the lineage of his followers which has survived over generations. I' ve observed that those amongst us, even at this moment, who follow his "form" of principles are not overtly religious, particularly ceremonial religion, whatever religion they might be from. This shows an evolutionary trait of our society that is blossoming over time albeit silently, without the archetypal fanfare, and rightly so. 


I think this is the biggest Unique Success of his philosophy, for what else can man's spiritualism attain greater heights by, than the inclusive evolution of its own form over time.
I feel the ever ascending glory that keeps emanating from his spiritual core. We are a blessed lot. The flame, leading kindly light, shall burn forever.

VIVEKANANDA , THE FEARLESS INDIAN

The photograph of the letter posted as "BLESSINGS TO NIVEDITA" reads :

"The mother's heart, the hero's will,
The sweetness of the southern breeze,
The sacred charm and strength that dwell
On Aryan altars, flaming, free;
All these be yours, and many more
No ancient soul could dream before --
Be thou to India's future son
The mistress, servant, friend in one.

With the blessings of Vivekananda"

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

WHAT DID VIVEKANANDA MEAN BY  "MISTRESS" HERE?

What I am going to write should sound sacrilegious  (But the nonconformist devil that I am, can't be defied, after I discovered long back that my alter-ego cannot be de-ified).

Narendranath was fearless, (the reason why Ramakrishna, who had always advised the common mortal to avoid Kamini & Kanchan as far as possible, felt The Spark in him, the one who could and eventually would carry forward His Message to the furthest confines of the universe ) - he doesn't care a hoot to write MiSTRESS here. I just think he didn't have an alternate word to put. 

In his times, the relationship of MISTRESS / Rakshita was well known in society (specially in houses bearing blue-blooded lineages of timeless financial abundance).

**I was born in a middle-class family, but coincidentally my great great paternal grandfather, ingloriously blue-blooded and may his soul rest in Silence, "maintained" one. I am congenitally red-blooded and stubbornly so. No shame here.** 

The relationship wouldn't be formalized by institutional auspice, and hushed voices whispered Adultery, and it was a vice - it meant a woman suffering at the expense of another if you get what I mean. It was a VICE, and  I'm sure Narendranath didn't mean Rakshita here (even when he describes relationships elsewhere as JOUBONER UPOBON & BANOPROSTHER BARANASI - ** please correct me here, I don't think I quote him correctly here) 

I don't believe in ways Good or Bad. It's been my personal choice to look at things and evaluate them in my own incomplete, unfit, ill-endowed capacity in relevance of Correctness. 

It's Right or Wrong for me - I don't have the audacity to even sermonize on the issue. I can only say - there seems to be a constant process of extrapolation of the two abstracts of Good and Bad with time, rather with "the times they are a'changing" and relevant issues even exchange sides of the fence where Judgment of Morality is seated. 

A woman suffering at the expense of another woman is Incorrect. Wrong. In any age or era, it shall be wrong Forever. 

Yet there have been relationships , and there shall be, not formalized FOR society's peace, and flies on the wall keep humming to the tune of which we (me included at times) tap our toes over coffee. I am not putting illustrious examples here with names of minstrels, poets, writers, artists for that's not my purpose.

In such a relationship not vetoed by Society, no other woman suffers at the expense of another, no family disintegrates as collateral damage, no soul betrays the trust and respect of another. Even if such a relationship bears unblemished Love and spiritual exchanges of two egos and evolves in consciousness, nothing GOOD seems to come out FOR the society to glorify it. And if it's not GOOD, it has to be BAD - such is the dictum the "vociferous section" of our society follows.

Nothing lies in such a relationship for me to cry foul. It's just that I find NOTHING INCORRECT here.

It's difficult to look at things which are shaded black and white by a colour-blind society, where the shade is controversially Grey. 

While I await my share of brickbats, I will just reiterate that this is what I understood by the word MISTRESS here, and Narendranath was definitely and simply at a loss of coinage of terms. He didn't mean the traditionally vilified RAKSHITA here. He just fearlessly put his affirmative stamp on affairs perhaps with a fearless causticity for future circumstances where Society becomes the moral judge. Perhaps by default??