Shooting the messenger is the world’s favourite hobby. So, the media is roundly berated by media consumers as the harbinger of bad news. Media personnel have been termed by critics as the “nattering nabobs of negativism“.
We suck the warm, positive air out of this wonderful world the rest of humankind inhabits. We separate the wheat from the chaff, and print the chaff. We lead if it bleeds. We make up, steal, distort, spin, sin. Etcetera.
Well….
Well, it turns out, the criticism is not just not new but a lousy cliche.
At a seminar on the “Significance of Spiritual Journalism”, held under the auspices of Viveka Prabha, the monthly magazine published by the Sri Ramakrishna Mission, Mysore, the president of the mission in Cuddapah, Swami Atmavidanandaji, showed just why.
Reports Star of Mysore:
“Scribes tend to underplay the truth and highlight the negative aspects of the news to gain popularity. That creates a false picture of any incident giving wrong information to the readers.
“Once Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa visited a friend’s house and he was asked to sit on a bench where there was a newspaper lying on it.
“Paramahamsa asked his disciple to remove the newspaper and clean that bench with holy Ganga water.
“Asked for the reason, Paramahamsa said that the newspaper carried only bad and negative news. Therefore, it was necessary to clean the bench and then only sit on it.”
After narrating the incident, Swami Atmavidanandaji, reports the paper, called upon the journalists to imbibe spiritualism in their approach and writings to come out with “true-to-life” news.
***
Now, how “true-to-life” could this anecdote be?
Ramakrishna Paramahamsa lived from 1836-1886. None of the pictures show him holding or reading a newspaper. How likely is it that in the home of a devotee at least 120 years ago, a friend would have subscribed to a newspaper? Even if he did, were newspapers already in the sordid business of distorting the truth and spreading negative news?
Were all Bengali and English newspapers indulging in scurrilous journalism back then? On every page, every day, everywhere? Or was there a specific story that day that the Swami was aware of? If it was the latter, wasn’t Paramahamsa guilty of branding all newspapers as bad and negative?
And what precisely is “bad”?
How did Paramahamsa know that the disciple had holy Ganga water at home to be produced at that very moment? How was he sure that its miraculous powers extended to wiping the sins committed by newspapers and journalists? Would it work only for all-seeing him, or for the disciple too?
And did he get the holy water and did it work?
Encyclopaedia Britannica reports that “it was about this time [1880s] that Calcutta newspapers and journal articles first referred to Ramakrishna as the Hindu saint or as the Paramahamsa.” Did Paramahamsa express his scepticism of these labels being given to him by “bad and negative” newspapers?
All these are silly, trivial questions, of course, but that is the essence of journalism, asking silly questions and putting “the truth” to the test. As the old saying goes: there is nothing called a silly question, only silly answers. And “Spiritual Journalism” by its very definition is an oxymoron; either it can be spiritual or it can be journalism. One is based on faith, the other on facts.
In other words, where specifically has this wondrous story of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa on newspapers been recorded and reported? And by which journalist, writer, biographer?
Tell us another, O Spiritual One, and stick to the facts.
Or shift to journalism.
O Jouranisitis infected one ..O Soul..the one spiritually advanced by 120 hateful years..kindly open a browser and do a wikipedia search on Shri Ramakrishna Parmamahamsa… you will find that the ‘Theistic Quarterly Review was in circulation in 1879.
O Soul which emenates the putrid smell of Pseudosecular stink…to which anything glorious about Hinduism is allergic…here are the facts for you to stick it up your…you know what.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_media_in_India
” Media in India—initiated since the late 1700s with print media started in 1780, radio broadcasting initiated in 1927, and the screening of Auguste and Louis Lumière moving pictures in Bombay initiated during the July of 1895 —is among the oldest and largest media of the world.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramakrishna
“Many prominent people of Calcutta—Pratap Chandra Mazumdar, Shivanath Shastri and Trailokyanath Sanyal—began visiting him during this time (1871-1885). Mozoomdar wrote the first English biography of Ramakrishna, entitled The Hindu Saint in the Theistic Quarterly Review (1879), which played a vital role in introducing Ramakrishna to Westerners like the German indologist Max Muller.[74] Newspapers reported that Ramakrishna was spreading “Love” and “Devotion” among the educated classes of Calcutta and that he had succeeded in reforming the character of some youths whose morals had been corrupt.”
Holier than Thou Scribes can’t take any critisicism in their stride :)
After all the pen (now the keyboard) is mightier than the Sword (even if they need to keep dipping that Quill in the free liquor handed out by the favourite Party or the free wine bottles handed out by those Colonial in fashion religious structures). Well hasn’t this very mighty journalist coloured the pictures from KPN … well all in the name of..Nautanki.
This reminds me of some saying in the lines of, Somebody showing you the moon and you seeing only the pointing finger. Its your choice what you want to see. ( Or what you wanna understand from a story)
While skepticism about the event in question may be fair, it is clear that the one expressing it here is almost totally ignorant of Hinduism, even geography.
Ganga flows through Kolkata. In any case, every Hindu household is supposed to keep some holy water from the river. Many rituals require Ganga water. It is also given to a person immediately after he passes away. These days, of course, things are changing but in those days there would have been virtually no household that did not have the water, that too in Kolkata.
“Parmahansa” (Supreme Swan) is specific sanskrit title of honour in a hierarchy of enlightened spiritual teachers that include “siddhas” and “naths” who are more than “saints”, for want of better word. In any case, as most of us should know, the Hindi/Sanskrit equivalent of saint is “sant”.
Ram Krishna was not designated Parmahansa loosely by ordinary individuals. The media then only reported the fact that he had ascended to that level.
Some assumptions (stupid) people make:
#0 Everything about today is decadent. Media, politicians, godmen, youth, people, movies, actors, pubs, bars, and 101 other things., Everything that was old is divine. A Newspaper from 1836, Javahar Lal Nehru, Sai baba(old), paramahamsa(old), Rajkapur/Rajkumar and 101 other things that existed.
#1 People on average are stunningly intelligent. It is Media and politicians who are dumb.
I think the correct assumptions would be:
#0 Most of the things/people/media/movies/godmen etc about today are crap; they were even crappier earlier. Or atleast equally crap as now.
#1 People on average are stunningly idiotic; both now and then. Media and politicians are mediocre. It is alwasys mediocracy which attracts dumb people because intelect is beyond their understanding.
I am not surprised about Ramakarishna Paramahamsa’s criticism against newspapers as he criticized almost all worldly activites.
RKP for all his wisdom was highly opinionated and had views which if followed would be considered nutty in the modern day world.
He viewed sex and women as something to be avoided by all the youths who came to him. He exhorted his disciples all (majority of them young males in their late teens) to practice celibacy and avoid Kamini and Kanchana. He used to tell people to view all women as mothers. A very limited perception of women. He had an aversion towards money and he even had a physical reaction of burning when he sat on a bed which had some coins.
I am pretty sure that most of RKP’s followers do not take his teachings seriously. They would be considered freaks of the highest order if they do follow.
How many more comments before the Hindutwits wake up and start asking why the churumuritwits do not subject the stories, fables, parables and anecdotes of Christ and Allah to similar scrutiny?
but there is an element of truth to it isn’t it AS?
I hope churumuri isn’t suggesting that asking silly questions to test the truth is not an exclusively right of card carrying members of the media. On this particular issue, churumuri is very antsy. It has previously constructed and deconstructed Abdul Kalam on this very issue. I hope churumuri is not saying that the media’s truth cannot be tested or that it is beyond truth.
We all know media is edited. Both Vinod Mehta and churumuri have on more than one occasion defended the bias in editorial. something to the effect that we cannot be sappe to our sensitivities …
So let us see this bias in action. To this largely innocuous and inconsequential(how many people does this affect and how many hang on to the word of this monk of the ramakrishna order) churumuri is all perceptive. time and again churumuri has applied other tests of ‘rationality’ against the ‘obscurantism’ of hindus – the sundry matha/guru controversies, the thing about some astrolger and by extension every goofed up ill posture of BSY, and every did and didn’t of BSY etc etc., it has captured.
but today veerappa moily said, the most rational and urgent decision of decriminalizing homosexuality will be vetted against the irrational position of the christian church.
So my point is this. Will churumuri haul moily over coal for even considering the irrationality and obscurantism of the christian church?
in this particular issue the primary rational is justice for a homosexuals. will the ratinalists stand for this or will they yet again be blinded the granddaddy of all rationalist purposes – tyranny of the majority?
wtf is christian church to tell us what we should and should not do – please note,as far as the church is concerned, the “morality” on this issue is shaped completely by notions alien to our people. most indians are ignorant/insensitive/agnostic about this issue. by this i mean most indians are not invested in criminalizing homosexuality. i am not making any other claims, even if hindu priests have solemnized homosexual marraiges before and transexuality has a certain level of acceptance, and they even have a certain level of piety associated with it (bruhannaLa, ardhanaareeshwara, etc etc). but in practice, most hindu are more likely to agonize over the issue at a personal level, rather than seek society wide moral imposition, especially in concern for their own salvation. that much agnosticism is built into the obscurantist hindus.
If you question the holy middlemen you will be struck down by god! We dont need people who question or seek out the truth for themselves. We need people to follow the words of these godmen without raising any inconvenient questions about their public utterances. You cannot call a spade a spade when it comes to these enlightened ones.
On another note – cleaning the bench with Ganga water might not do as much good these days as it did 120 years ago, what with all the pollution by overpopulation and all.
Churumuri, I guess you totally missed the point. So, your next post is going to question ‘Pushpaka Vimaana’ from Ramayana with some ‘facts’? WOW – what a great journalism! Smiles…
The christian church indulging in irrationality and falsehood is a defense for hindu swamijis indulging in the same?
BTW the stand taken by national council of churches:
http://in.christiantoday.com/articles/church-to-oppose-legalization-of-gay-sex-in-india/4118.htm
Strange since I have heard that lonely padris would have a lot to gain if their activities were legalized…
Whether or not the anecdote is a fable, Churumuri’s question is valid.
Only when it appreciates criticism — even uninformed or picky — can any philosophy thrive, the Vedanta included. I wish someone from the Ramakrishna Math would respond directly; sometimes anecdotes, true or not, are so memorable that they begin to denote a philosophy instead of image it.
I wish I remembered my “Ramakrishna Kathamrita” well enough to respond more substantively.
But regardless of the valid question, Churumuri may have missed the woods for the tree. I say so particularly because the Ramakrishna Math/Mission’s impact on our society — including on our journalists and their journalism — has seldom, if ever, found a nuanced exposition on this blog. At this stage, I don’t wish to expound on the nature/details of that multifaceted impact — it would be like attempting to describe the monsoon’s impact on our agriculture. I will leave those details for other doughty (or unemployed!) souls, living in India or abroad, to attempt.
May I admit much personal benefit in reading/hearing critical scholarship authored by the late swamis Vivekananda, Prabhavananda, Nikhilananda, Ranganathananda, Yatiswarananda, (and the living octogenarians) Yogeshananda, Sureshananda and Bhajanananda?
I have met the swami Atmavidananda (mentioned in the above post) on several occasions, and have been impressed me with his self-effacing simplicity, his child-like chuckles and, yes, his unique wit. Not that I’m remotely qualified to offer such a comment, but he is as noble as any man I know.
Overall, the Ramakrishna Mission does not represent a cult which revels in tales of personality; it represents a genuine inquiry into the finest tradition of India’s philosophy, the Vedanta. I am convinced that appreciating the Vedanta — in its nuanced compassion/acceptance of diversity in a quest for a self-realization — is a path to, yes, world peace.
If chief minister B.S. Yedyurappa is serious about using Indian philosophy to make a difference in the world, then he should offer a study of the Vedanta — not of bogus astrology masquerading as science — as an optional subject in all degree programs. If he decides to, he should consult with the scholars of the Ramakrishna Math, whose books/journals/authors present a confluence of some of the finest — sometimes utilitarian — criticism of the Vedanta.
And, as unpalatably patronizing as this may sound, I hope Churumuri for all its fine posts — for which I am grateful — will some day find the woods rather than the tree! (That’s my own quest too.)
On homosexuality:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/11121/muslim-leaders-oppose-reported-moves.html
The muslim leadership now seem to be showing again how they are more interested in denying others their rights rather than working towards real progress of the country and their community.
It is ironic – they blame ‘western decadence’ while the church seems to have the same stand.
I wonder if some of these religious committees/leaders will never be happy unless they are suppressing, killing and making war with others all the time.
“… where specifically has this wondrous story …” Bloggers forgetting to use google ??
Here are 2 translations from the Kathamrita:
1. Swami Nikhilananda’s translation
http://www.ramakrishnavivekananda.info/gospel/volume_2/38_devotees_in_calcutta.htm
As Sri Ramakrishna was about to take the seat reserved for him, he saw a newspaper lying near it. He signed to someone to remove the paper. Since a newspaper contains worldly matters — gossip and scandal —, he regarded it as unholy. After the paper was removed he took his seat. Nityagopal came forward and bowed low before the Master.
2. Dharam Pal Gupta’s translation (Parallel Text ?)
http://www.kathamrita.org/kathamrita/k1sec14.htm
While sitting down Thakur notices a newspaper lying there. The newspapers have to do with worldly-minded men, worldly matters, gossip and running down others. So newspaper is something unholy for Sri Ramakrishna. He makes a sign that it should be removed from there.
When the newspaper is taken away, he takes his seat. Nityagopal pays his obeisance.
There is similar instance in the life of Swami Ramakrishnananda (Shashi Maharaj), a direct disciple of Sri Ramakrishna and person responsible for spread of Ramakrishna-Vivekananda-Vedanta movement in South. May be (??), Swami Atmavidanandaji mixed up these similar events.
All along, i believed, Ganga water is available in sealed copper vessel of every hindu family!!
AG,
The muslims would not have objected, if sex with animals(sheep,goat,hen etc) were legalised as this is halal in Islam. Read Arun Shouries insightful book “The world of Fatwas” for more information on this halal activity ;)
Moreover, someone should ask this protesting mullahs what they are supposed to do with 28 young boys that every devout muslim is gifted when he enters allah’s hoourhouse ;)
Mayura,
I dont care what a christian, muslim or hindu believes in personally. Your personal superstition is yours – seriously who am I to comment whether you worship 1000 irrational gods or 1 irrational one?
However when personal superstitions and irrationality is used to suppress others rights and foster herd mentality, how can one stand by and be silent?
Anyway, some good news delivered by the high court, which should leave the human-appointed mullahs, padris, swamijis writhing:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8129836.stm
The judgement text itself is a very interesting read:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/02_07_09_india_gay.pdf
See the sections on oral and anal sex and the hypocritical attitudes of the past.
*Vikas Akalwadi*
Many thanks for your citation. Now we know the anecdote’s source.
*All*
On a related note, I offer kudos to Star of Mysore for providing a relatively accurate report.
The historical method (eyewitness-statement-recorded-documented) – which produced the anecdote – renders redundant Churumuri’s question of “how ‘true-to-life'” the anecdote is.
But Churumuri’s other questions remain unanswered – until another Vikas Akalwadi comes by. :) For example, the questions about how we define “bad,” and how Girish Chandra Ghosh “g[o]t the holy water and did it work”.
Those questions reflect the contrarian approach for which I love Churumuri. But then, so does Churumuri’s rather naive proposition, “‘Spiritual Journalism’ by its very definition is an oxymoron; either it can be spiritual or it can be journalism. One is based on faith, the other on facts.”
Practically, there need not be a contradiction between faith and fact if the faith is a function of fact. As C. Rajagopalachari the Vedantist states in his famous preface to M.S. Subbulakshmi’s rendering of one of Adi Sankara’s poems, “To believe that gnyana and bhakti, knowledge and devotion, are different from each other is ignorance.”
Then consider this:
Sigmund Freud found that life was a quest for pleasure, driven by unconscious desire. Alfred Adler, inspired by Friedrich Nietzsche, taught that life was a quest for power. Victor Frankl, the Holocaust survivor, argued that life was a quest for meaning.
Earlier to all of those celebrated psychologists, Sri Ramakrishna proposed that life was an unconscious quest for “God-realization.” That was Ramakrishna’s theory of what drives man (and woman). Barely literate as he was, his theory reflected a profound and meditative immersion in the “what is life” question – it was a method which today’s social scientists might grandly call “participant observation.”
Ramakrishna’s theory was not penned in an American academic journal, and whether we believe in it or not – or like it or not – the theory, like any other academic exposition, is worth exploring. That is what, in my belief, Rev. Swami Atmavidananda and his cohorts in the Ramakrishna Math are doing.
For their effort, I am grateful. And to read the result of their explorations, I am eager.
Akalwadi’s links just link back to ‘gospels’ put up by Ramakrishna Ashram affiliated sites? The same ashram which the swami who told these stories belongs to?
This is neither a recorded newspaper article nor an unobjective or scholarly third party account but some hagiography put up by the same source of the stories.
Using recursion to define something is a mark of someone trying very hard to justify their bogus.
I prefer churumuri’s commensense to this kind of hoodwinking anyday.
When will these ‘holy-men’ learn? Maybe they know there are suckers born everyday…
Ananymous Guy – You can not hope to argue with such logic. People of Akalwadi’s kind know for sure that xyz Swami is right because xyz Swami says so.
All that sane part of the world can do is what you just did. Just point out what they say.
Anonymous Guy,
When something happens away from the public eye, it is very hard for there to be a “third party” to verify the happenings.
A different approach would be to ask the question, “What would the recorder or Paramahamsa gain from having this story out there?”. IOW, what gain would they have in saying things about newspapers and journalists when it is clearly not the main focus of their mission?
I would tend to believe that the incident happened. I however don’t really believe it means all that much. If you read the accounts of Paramahamsa (and other spiritual figures) by their adoring devotees, you will find that it contains plenty of mundane trivia that are recorded because the adoration removes the ability of the devotee to determine if an utterance or incident is really worthy of record. I would put this one in the same category.
At the end of the day, it’s not worth our time to confirm whether said incident actually happened through third of fourth party verifications. There was a point to be made, and it was made. That’s that as far as I am concerned.
GK3S,
Sure, points were made, taken or rejected. My point being, religious institutions, leaders and public spokespersons should be held up to the same standards as a newspaper, political leader, bureaucrat or citizen making public statements (maybe none of these have yet reached high standards yet in our country).
Religious leaders are no holy cows, and they cannot hide behind veils of spiritualism or self-appointed smugness. No one cares if they make statements about their religion or their followers, but if they step up to the plate and talk about other institutions and individuals, they will be treated as equals – not embodiments of gods. The point they made will be analyzed and criticized the same way as anyone else and if they talked BS, it will be called out.
AG:
For all the points analysed I object to the usage of “B.” This reflects the lack of grace and exposes the depth in the language.Churumuri as a platform should desist from promoting language of this kind.
Yadavagiri,
Objection noted. I lack grace in writing, nothing much I can do about it :) I cannot fake what I am not – so will stick with colloquial terms.
And my take is that language changes, what may seem graceful and deep to you may be outdated and antiquated to someone else. And the platform does not judge that, the time and age does.
I am not sure what one should do if they come across language they dont approve of…
Words like ‘bullshit’, ‘shit’ etc. have entered the common lexicon now. On ‘calling bullshit’, an interesting review by New Yorker magazine on a book by a similar name, which explains the term in detail:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/08/22/050822crat_atlarge
So: I still call bullshit on the swamiji’s public statements about another swamiji asking a bench with a newspaper on it to be washed with water from Ganges.
‘X’ Guy,
You mean to say, you will call for bullshit to help the proceedings along?:)
I agree with yadavagiri. We should stop using words like BS, f*ck, shit, c*nt, and so on. We should also erase them from dictionaries and make people forget those words. And after we forget these words go onto other words such as idi*t, bast*rd, nons*nse and so on. Finally ban words like secular*sm, rati*nal thinking, athe*sm, non beli*f should be abolished. Only words mentioned in Bible, Bhagavadgeeta and Khoran should be allowed.
Abhi,
:)
BTW considering the adult themes these holy books deal with, they must contain swear words in their ‘holy’ forms.
Unfortunately – Anonymous Guy, you have not understood the holy books. Please understand the below 2 logics:
1. All the violence and x rated part in every holy book is the result of YOUR ignorance.
2. All the violence and x rated part in every holy book is justified because other holy book contains it too.
Abhi darling,
What is an x rated part? The immaculate conception or the travails of Dhirghatamassu ? After erasing all the words you dont like will you then erase thinking too!
Abhi,
Fortunately I haven’t read any holy book in great detail. Hence I only conjectured (‘must contain…’) that they probably had swear words.
But your logic is bullet-proof, I accept it just like a holy book.
while there is truth to the fact for most purposes we can write without profanity, i am not a big fan of fatwas against them.
akka gaby. i had a similar post in which, apart from the above, i whined about how intercourse, mating and issues that arise around them had been reduced to “x-rated”. but it was going all over the konkaNa without ever reaching mylara. as if on cue the otherwise stable wordprocessor crashed.
but your post went straight to the point when you zeroed in dheerghatamas. yen, maaDodu most of our new bruhaspatis wield the most basic and hence easily accessible(aka popular) results of rationalism and wield it relentlessly to rationalize their own tamas.
TS and Gaby – my bad, if you didn’t get what I was speaking – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcasm.
TS-I really can’t make out half of what you say. Please keep dumb people like me when you write something.
Gosh Abhi- was that what you were aspiring to do sweetheart- my apologies.
It is truly becoming tough to appreciate sarcasm in a churumuri dripping with what the right wing loonies think is earnestness.
TS thamma, do the Brihaspathis rationalise or attempt at rationalising their tamas- in any case the losers are always Mamata and Dirghatamas.
Abhi,
I suspect all holy books are written by our very own TS.
So hard to be sarcastic infront of holy gurus and holy books. Religious zealots make every idiot look like Einstein.
gaby quick question.
what is that episode an allegory to? literal reading there are physiological problems alva?
another. exertion of will is a characteristic of all bruhaspathis – men and women. and they have done this irrespective of the gender of the object. without that there is no purushartha for any person.