[photo attribution: Ravivg5, CC BY-SA 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons]
Great Grand Wisdom of Vivekananda [I]
You’d encounter the above quote in Swami Vivekananda’s Quotes On Food . By ‘ BRAHMAN ‘, the Almighty God ( Brahma, Visnu & Mahesha ) was meant. Evidently, Vivekananda regarded our ‘ FOOD ‘ as God the Almighty. It’s also clear as day that he believed that the ‘ ENERGY ‘ that keeps us alive ( i.e. our life force that we derive from our food such as rice, wheat, pulses, apples, pineapples, eggs, meat, fish, etc. ) happened to be God’s ‘ UNIVERSAL ENERGY ‘.
In the same piece of writing, you’ll encounter these words : ‘All the forces that are working in this body have been produced out of food; we see that every day. If you begin to fast, first your body will get weak, the physical forces will suffer; then after a few days, the mental forces will suffer also. First, memory will fail. Then comes a point, when you are not able to think, much less to pursue any course of reasoning ‘. Vivekananda held this view too.
So, ‘ FOOD ‘ is God. Vivekananda believed so. God the Almighty is Not a bodiless, hence formless, entity ( or energy, something like gravity, heat, electricity, etc. ) that resides in his heavenly abode and governs the Universe. The great sannyasin had this realization after doing a lot of yoga & meditation. ‘ All the forces ‘ that we derive from the ‘ FOOD ‘ we consume together constitute our life force that keeps us alive. No ‘ FOOD ‘ means No life, which means there’s No atmna or this atmna is the other name of the life force that’s lying hidden in our ‘ FOOD ‘.
But, but … if ‘ FOOD ‘ has got the atmna, how come boiled eggs, chicken curries, chow mein, biryani, shish kabab, meat pilau, sweets, etc. show No signs of life then, wonders the Sensible mind. How come apples, pineapples, mangos, etc. do Not scream like hogs Nor twitch like fishes in throes as I cut them with a sharp knife and chew them before swallowing ? Are they mightier than me ? Is the ‘ FOOD ‘ Almighty Really ?
If ‘ FOOD ‘ is God, God canNot be the creator of the ‘ FOOD ‘ as the creator canNot, as Einstein argued, create itself. Who creates ‘ FOOD ‘ then ? Biology says it’s phytoplankton, zooplankton, animals, plants & trees, and mushrooms that create our ‘ FOOD ‘. Plant-eating animals are the ‘ FOOD ‘ of flesh eaters. Thus, a plant-eating animal is a God too. Some flesh eaters are ‘ FOOD ‘ of some other flesh eaters like crocos, sharks, etc., and so they’re Gods too. Humans are consumed by hyenas, wolves, tigers, sharks, etc. Therefore, humans are also Gods. Evidently, Gods are countless, and one God devours another. Of course None of these Gods are the Vedic God the Almighty. What is Right then ? The Vedic wisdom ? Or Vivekananda’s wisdom ?
Why did he worship the naked Kali as the Mother of the world and sacrifice goats, Real gods, before this lifeless idol ?
Great Grand Wisdom of Vivekananda [II]
[photo attribution: Unknown authorUnknown author, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]
‘ According to Ramanuja, there are three things in food we must avoid. First, there is Jâti, the nature, or species of the food, that must be considered. All exciting food should be avoided, as meat, for instance; this should not be taken because it is by its very nature impure. We can get it only by taking the life of another. We get pleasure for a moment, and another creature has to give up its life to give us that pleasure. ‘
You’re certain to run across the above words uttered by Vivekananda, the great Hindu sannyasin, who won over the Parliament of World’s Religions in 1893 if you have a look at Swami Vivekananda’s Quotes On Food . Evidently, Vivekananda endorsed a Ramanuja’s stance on eating meat that he regarded Not only as a sort of ‘ exciting food ‘ but as ‘ impure ‘ as well, and he considered it so ‘ because it is [so] by its very nature ‘. ‘ We can get it only ‘, argued the great sannyasin, ‘ by taking the life of another. ‘ A fantastic argument! The mango is ‘ impure ‘ because you stole it from your neighbour’s orchard. It’s got contaminated; it’s turned poisonous because it was stolen. All antibiotics, vaccines, etc., and hence the entire science of medicine as well as physiology are ‘ impure ‘ on similar grounds. To study physiology and medicine and do researches, you have to dissect animals. The efficacy as well as side effects of drugs are tested by subjecting innocent guinea pigs to such tests that often prove deadly. MK Gandhi detested scientific drugs for these reasons, but Vivekananda saw Nothing wrong with them and frequently used to visit doctors to get treated for insomnia, malaria, diabetes, liver & kidney dysfunction, heart disease, etc. illnesses he suffered from.
Nevertheless, plants & trees also have life. Science says this. Vivekananda was Not aware of it. He was well versed in Vedas, etc. holy texts but did Not care to know the ABC of science. He did Not know that fruits & food grain are also live as they contain. like poultry eggs (fertilized), live embryos. Potatos, cabbages, cauliflowers, mustard seeds, groundnuts, grams, peas, pulses, etc., etc. are all live stuff too. The mouth-watering sweet solid yogurt is full of live organisms ( mainly Lactobacillus bacteria ). Vivekananda, like Ramanuja, seems to have held the silly view that plants & trees are lifeless beings, but Adi Shankara was aware that ‘ immovable (apparently inanimate) objects (like the tree) are endowed with sentience ‘. However, from this, it does Not follow that Adi Shankara was aware that plants & trees have life as he believed in the Vedic wisdom by which, ‘ the Absolute, called Brahman, ‘ was present in everything, living beings as well as ‘ immovable (apparently inanimate) objects ‘ that included plants & trees as well as rocks & stones, lakes, rivers, mountains, clouds, rain, the earth, the moon, the sun, etc., etc.
Nevertheless, it’s evident, by Vivekananda’s view, that there canNot exist any food stuff that deserves to be reckoned pure or ‘ sattvik ‘. What will eat sannyasins and other pious people ?
Nevertheless, Vivekananda did Never practise what he loved to preach. In Real life, he was both a good cook and a great food lover whose favourite food items included both goat meat and ilisha of the Ganges. Evidently, Vivekananda, like all other pious people, was Not free of the Most common contradiction between the principle preached by them and their actual practice.
Interestingly, the great sannyasin’s view of the ‘ impure ‘ food glaringly contradicts his famous view that ‘ FOOD ‘ is ‘ BRAHMAN ‘ ( Swami Vivekananda’s Quotes On Food ). The silly sannyasin was Not aware that the act of dividing the ‘ FOOD ‘ into pure and impure categories adds up to classifying God ( ‘ BRAHMAN ‘ ) as pure and impure as well.
Vivekananda also said, ‘ Eating meat is only allowable for people who do very hard work, and who are not going to be Bhaktas; … ‘ (ibid) So, it’s clear as day that Not only was the wise monk against banning the consumption of the ‘ exciting ‘, ‘ impure ‘ foodstuff called ‘ meat ‘, he even prescribed it for those people, and those people alone, who had to perform ‘ very hard work ‘. Implicit in these words of his is the admission that the pure,’ sattvik ‘ food (viewed by Hindus as the best kind of food) is a lot deficient in the energy-content and so unfit for the hard-working people.
‘ … a good deal of the misery we suffer ‘, further says Vivekananda, ‘ is occasioned by the food we take. ‘ (ibid) Of course, the food that is to blame for ‘ a good deal of the misery we suffer ‘ is Non-sattvik like the ‘ exciting ‘, ‘ impure ‘ meat. ‘ There are certain foods which are exciting; if you eat such food, you find that you cannot control the mind. It is obvious that after drinking a large quantity of wine, or other alcoholic beverage, a man finds that his mind would not be controlled; it runs away from his control. ‘ (ibid) Thus, the genius sannyasin enlightens you about another striking feature of the Non-sattvik ‘ exciting ‘ food : the intake of such food is certain to lead you to lose control over your ‘ mind ‘ and make you behave like a drunk. I seem to be a born Nonvegetarian, but to this day I Really doN’t know whether I ever got drunk or saw anyone get drunk after eating meat.
‘ The taking of life is undoubtedly sinful; but so long as vegetable food is not made suitable to the human system through progress in chemistry, there is no other alternative but meat-eating. ‘ (Swami Vivekananda’s quotes and comments on meat-eating; ibid) It’s another proof that Vivekananda was ignorant of the Fact that plants & trees are living beings. It’s implied that he’s all for the ‘ vegetable food ‘ when it’s ‘ made suitable to the human system through progress in chemistry ‘ just because it’s free of the sin of the ‘ taking of life ‘.
The sannyasin was Right to claim that ‘ eating meat may help one, eating fruit another. ‘ (ibid) Nevertheless, what is noteworthy is by claiming this, he questioned the very concept of the universal goodness of vegetarianism, hence sattvik food,
Another most intriguing remark by Vivekananda is : ‘ but Vyasa tries to put meanings upon the Vedas to cheat the poor Shudras. ‘ (ibid) This ‘ Vyasa ‘ that Vivekananda called a ‘ cheat ‘., was, according to Vivekananda, a Brahmin. But Vyasa was borne, as far as I know, by Rani Satyavati, a Non-aryan, tribal girl, when she was a maiden. Was Vyasa a Brahmin Really?
Great Grand Wisdom of Vivekananda [III]
[photo attribution:Thomas Harrison, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]
‘… man is the greatest of all beings. … man alone becomes God; and they [the Devas & the angels all] have to become men again in order to become God.’
The above words occur in a letter written by Vivekananda in 1895 to a Mrs Bull. They give us the idea of how high was Vivekananda’s view of man. Now let’s have a look at the following citations.
‘ God is here, in all these human souls. He is the soul of man. ‘
‘ God is in everything, where else shall we go to find Him? He is already in every work, in every thought, in every feeling. ‘
‘ God is in every man, whether man knows it or not. ‘
‘ God is man’s very Self. ‘
‘ God manifests Himself to you in man. ‘
‘ He is always in us and with us. ‘
‘ He is in everything, He is everything. Every man and woman is the palpable, blissful, living God. ‘
‘ He is in the heart of man, the Soul of our souls, the Reality in us. ‘
‘ If you are not God, there never was any God, and never will be. ‘
‘ If there is a God, He is in our own hearts. ‘
In order to access these citations, you’ve got to click on the same link as that given above. It’s clear as day what Vivekananda wants to tell us about God (the ‘ He ‘) and man’s relationship with God.
Nevertheless, in Bhagavad Gita, we encounter these words of Lord Krishna, the Creator of the world :
‘ All living beings dwell in Me, but I do not dwell in them. ‘ ( Bhagavad Gita 9.4 )
The contradiction between the Great sannyasin and the Lord of the world is glaring like the Mid-day summer sun. Who do you think is trustworthy?
Nevertheless, Vivekananda must be WRONG. It’s because God is All-Powerful. There’s Nothing God, the Supreme Being, canNot do. God is Brahman the Absolute. God is the Creator of the Universe. God creates, destroys, and sustains too. So, if Vivekananda were Right, so many people (around 3.9 Million so far) would Not die of the COVID-19, a disease caused by Most insignificant beings called viruses, Right?
But then, Lord Krishna canNot deserve to be considered Right either. His claim that ‘ All living beings dwell in Me ‘ adds up to claiming that everything, the COVID-19 viruses included, enjoys the shield of protection of the All-Powerful Supreme Being, the Brahman the Absolute, the Lord of the Universe. If He were True, the humble humans could Not invent any therapy or vaccines to kill the deadly viruses, the way I see it.
Great Grand Wisdom of Vivekananda ( IV )
[photo attribution: Appaiah, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons]
God that is both Knowable & Unknowable.
Vivekananda believed in God. He stated the reason in unequivocal terms :
‘ I see God, therefore He exists. ‘
( The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda | Volume 1 | Lectures And Discourses )
His argument reminds me of the well-known saying that ‘ Seeing is believing. ‘ I believe the Great sannyasin Really saw something with his own eyes, something that led him to have the impression that it must be his beloved God. Nevertheless, the problem we have accepting it as True is the Fact that we Nonbelievers can Neither see God with our eyes Nor perceive the existence of any such things with our Reason. You Really doN’t need to be a believer, if you’ve got sound eyesight and sound mind, to witness sights or events that are Real. For example, everyone with sound eyesight and sound mind can see the rising sun on the eastern horizon today, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, and any other day, provided the sky above the eastern horizon is Not overcast, and thus come to know that the morning sun appears on the eastern horizon. To be sure that you’re Not dreaming Nor hallucinating, you’ve got to shut your eyes and then open your eyes again. You must repeat this process three times in succession. If with your eyes shut, you cease to see anything, and if after you’ve opened your eyes again, the morning sun reappears, and you’re able to see your hands and feet again each time, you should be sure that it’s Neither a dream Nor a hallucination. The Truth or Fact is demonstrable and verifiable. You may demonstrate the Fact that the morning sun appears and reappears on the eastern horizon everyday or the Fact that light dispels darkness to anyone, either a believer or a Nonbeliever, and thus prove it True. Nevertheless, the most important Point the sensible should Not fail to take cognisance of is Not only did Vivekananda fail lamentably to make the God of his belief visible to the Nonbelievers, he also failed similarly to present a trustworthy account of his experience of the encounter with his beloved God.
And then he himself made the issue far more complicated by claiming that his beloved God is ‘ Unknowable ‘.
‘ A God known is no more God; … He cannot be known He is always the Unknowable One, ‘ remarked Vivekananda. ( The Absolute and Manifestation — Swami Vivekananda )
The ‘ Unknowable ‘ canNot be visible to anyone, be they believers or Nonbelievers, the way the sensible view it. But Vivekananda wants us to believe that he saw the ‘ Unknowable ‘ entity. He also described God in these words: God is the one ‘ “From whom is the birth, continuation, and dissolution of the universe,” — He is Ishvara — “the Eternal, the Pure, the Ever-Free, the Almighty, the All-Knowing, the All-Merciful, the Teacher of all teachers”; and above all, Sa Ishvarah anirvachaniya-premasvarupah — “He the Lord is, of His own nature, inexpressible Love.” ‘ ( The Philosophy of Ishvara — Swami Vivekananda ) Thus, he wanted to prove that he was Really possessed of extraordinary eyesight that allowed him to sight the invisible. You should Not fail to take cognisance of the fact that the illustrious sannyasin did Not claim that his beloved God ‘ the Eternal, the Pure, the Ever-Free, the Almighty ‘ was a microscopic or a telescopic being and hence visible only through certain special instruments or glasses.
The matter then got further complicated with his claim that ‘ God is more than knowable. ‘ ( The Absolute and Manifestation — Swami Vivekananda ) Thus, it’s obvious that by Vivekananda’s vocabulary, ‘ Unknowable ‘= ‘ more than knowable. ‘
‘ This is a great fact to learn, ‘ observed the wise sannyasin by way of explanation. (ibid)
‘ You must not go home with ‘, he added, ‘ the idea that God is unknowable in the sense in which agnostics put it. ‘ (ibid)
‘ For instance, here is a chair, ‘ he went on explaining, ‘ it is known to us. But what is beyond ether or whether people exist there or not is possibly unknowable. But God is neither known nor unknowable in this sense. ‘ (ibid)
Thus, we get acquainted with another instance of the Hindu monk’s extraordinary, nonpareil genius. It’s also another glaring-like-the-Mid-day-Summer-Sun proof of a Great big Lie uttered by the saffron-clad guy, namely, his claim to have attained the moksha defined as the union with ‘ the All-Knowing ‘ God and thus turned an omniscient seer, a Siddha Purusha. If he Truly were a Siddha Purusha, he would know that the idea of ‘ ether ‘, a hypothetical substance, that, as physicists of the 19th century believed, pervaded the entire Space and ‘ act[ed] as the medium for transmission of electromagnetic waves (e.g., light and X-rays) ‘ was wrong and due to be ‘ abandoned ‘ in the 20th century ( Ether ) and enlighten scientists about their mistake. The expression ‘ possibly unknowable ‘ becomes a damn Pseud. A True sannyasin that has attained moksha must know for sure what happens to be Truly ‘ unknowable ‘ and what Truly knowable. He must know for sure ‘ whether people exist there or not ‘.
Nevertheless, we’re now going through the Great grand wisdom of a professed sannyasin named Vivekananda. We’ve seen by his novel vocabulary, ‘ Unknowable ‘= ‘ more than knowable. ‘ Now we see he means that ‘ unknowable ‘ is Not the agnostic ‘ unknowable ‘.
‘ He is something ‘, the sannyasin continued, ‘ still higher than known; that is what is meant by God being unknown and unknowable. The expression is not used in the sense in which it may be said that some questions are unknown and unknowable. God is more than known. This chair is known, but God is intensely more than that because in and through Him we have to know this chair itself. He is the Witness, the eternal Witness of all knowledge. Whatever we know we have to know in and through Him. ‘ ( The Absolute and Manifestation — Swami Vivekananda )
Clearly, the wise sannyasin wants us to take his statement that God is ‘ unknowable ‘ to mean that ‘ God is more than known. ‘ The Reason? The reason is everything we’ve known we’ve had to know ‘ in and through ‘ his God. He’s given an illustration to prove this novel God-theory of his: ‘ This chair is known, but God is intensely more than that because in and through Him we have to know this chair itself. ‘ I Really doN’t know whether so far I’ve heard of any other argument that sounds more Ridiculous and elicits more disrespect for the person whose fertile brain brought forth such Silly stuff than this one.
Everyone, you and we Nonbelievers included, sees chairs, tables, humans, animals, plants & trees, mushrooms, lakes, rivers, glaciers, seas, oceans, deserts, forests, hills & mountains, clouds, rain, lightening, the sun, the moon, meteors, comets, countless stars in the night sky, etc., etc. ‘ in and through ‘ the God. Newton saw apples fall to the ground and became aware of the force of gravity ‘ in and through ‘ the God. Albert Einstein awoke to his famous equation E = mc2 ‘ in and through ‘ the God. The Wise sannyasin wants us to believe all this Rubbish. The silly monk did Not know that Newton believed in the Biblical God that Truly had No idea of gravity. Nor did he know that Einstein believed in the Spinoza’s God that did Not have any knowledge of the equivalence of matter and energy. Did his Omniscient God enlighten the believers about the cosmic forces, namely, gravity, electromagnetism, strong force, and weak force? What led him to believe that his beloved God was Omniscient Really? I’m still racking my brain over this query. Did his Omniscient God Really have any idea of metaled roads, railways, the reinforced concrete, suspension bridges, underground tunnels, underwater tunnels, overpasses, underpasses, aerial tramways, magnificent concrete buildings, awesome high-rises, paper, plastics, polyester fabrics, graphite pencils, blackboard chalks, blackboards, fountain pens, ballpoint pens, printing machines, lithography, photography, cinematography, X-ray, radiography, ultrasonography, xerography, holography, videography, ECG, EEG, echocardiography, computerized tomography, MRI, angiography, angioplasty, arthroplasty, open-heart surgery, coronary bypass surgery, plastic surgery, pace makers, blood pressure monitors, blood glucose monitors, apnea monitors, blood transfusion, bone-marrow transplantation, heart-valve transplantation, kidney transplantation, meniscus transplantation, appendectomy, mastectomy, vasectomy, hysterectomy, stethoscopes, microscopes, telescopes, eyesight correction lenses, sunglasses, cataract removal, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines, vitamins, proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, trace elements, HYV seeds, GM seeds, chemical fertilizers, shallow & deep tube wells, drip irrigation, insecticides, pesticides, fungicides, steam engines, IC engines, electric motors, tractors, combine harvesters, hydroelectricity, thermoelectricity, photoelectricity, aerogenerators, diesel generators, nuclear reactors, troposphere, stratosphere, ionosphere, ozonosphere, integrated circuits, liquid-crystal display, clocks & watches, telephones, cellphones, smartphones, fridges, TVs, air conditioners, computers, supercomputers, incandescent lamps, fluorescent lamps, halogen lamps, sodium-vapour lamps, mercury-vapour lamps, neon lamps, CFLs, LEDs, LPG, CNG, gas stoves, microwave ovens, induction cookers, blast furnaces, cars, buses, trains, trucks, giant ships, submarines, jumbo jets, supersonic jets, giant rockets, space vehicles, space stations, man-made satellites, space missions, stars, planets, meteors, comets, dark matter, antimatter, dark energy, nebulas, quasars, dying stars, neutron stars, black holes, galaxies, etc., etc.? If their Omniscient God is omniscient Really, how come None of these useful items, so useful that they’ve been indispensable for the Space-age life, occur in their holy books? The Fact of the matter is man had to learn to make things as simple as paper, pens, pencils, blackboard chalks, etc. from all the worldly men that, driven by their worldly curiosity, engaged in the cultivation of science & technology. The Truth of the matter is man has learnt Nothing useful from and so owes Nothing to any God or gods or any sannyasins of Vedic or epic age or of modern times. I even feel sceptical of whether their omniscient God was Really aware, before some man told him about it, that plants & trees have life.
‘ Knowledge is objectification, ‘ remarked Vivekananda. (ibid)
‘ The pictures, ‘ he explained, ‘ the impressions of all these things [i.e.. all the stuff visible to eyes ], are in my mind, and when I would try to think of them, to know them, the first act of knowledge would be to project them outside. This cannot be done with God, because He is the Essence of our souls, we cannot project Him outside ourselves. ‘ (ibid)
The Genius sannyasin said these words to explain why his beloved God is Not visible, hence Not knowable. By objects, he meant things like chairs, tables, plants & trees, etc. all the visible things existing outside of your mind, and by ‘ objectification ‘, he meant projecting ‘ pictures ‘ of these things ‘ outside ‘ of your mind. Nevertheless, he argues that God canNot be objectified thus because he believes that God ‘ is the Essence of our souls ‘. This view of his is fully in harmony with his view that ‘ God is man’s very Self. ‘ But it contradicts his view that ‘ God is in everything, … ‘ (ibid) The term ‘ everything ‘ means everything that exists, i.e. chairs, tables, plants & trees, mushrooms, humans, animals, etc., etc. If God exists in a wooden chair, then the ‘ objectification ‘ of the chair means the ‘ objectification ‘ of God too. Did the Wise sannyasin use the term ‘ everything ‘ to mean every human being alone and thus display his extraordinary command of English vocabulary to make himself an object of ridicule Really ? Bhakts of Vivekananda may argue that he did Not mean that God is the ‘ very Self ‘ or the ‘ Essence ‘ of objects like chairs, etc. and thus make the Sensible ask whether he then meant that God exists in things like chairs, tables, plants & trees, etc. like Redundant nails & screws, Parasitic viruses, funguses, bacteria or worms, etc., i.e. objects we can remove from these objects and thus objectify them. Do they believe so Really? Did the Wise sannyasin Really believe that God’s presence in ‘ everything ‘ other than human beings was Unwanted or Parasitic in nature, i.e. something Not like the womanhood of a woman but like an ugly blemish or blotch on a woman’s cheek ? Really curious to know !
‘ He is the Eternal Subject of everything, ‘ further says Vivekananda, ‘ I am the subject of this chair; I see the chair; so God is the Eternal Subject of my soul. How can you objectify Him, the Essence of your souls, the Reality of everything? ‘ ( The Absolute and Manifestation — Swami Vivekananda )
By the expression ‘ Subject of everything ‘, he meant ‘ everything ‘ is the object of God ( the ‘ Eternal Subject ‘ ) and thus exists outside of and is visible to God. This is another instance of the Great sannyasin’s matchless command of English vocabulary. Nevertheless, by his line of Reasoning, since he’s ‘ the subject of this chair ‘, the ‘ chair ‘ is his object, and so it exists independently of him to be visible to his eyes. But ‘ everything ‘ includes humans, animals, plants & trees, etc. too, and like human beings, every other living being has got a soul which is Nothing but the God’s ‘ Self ‘, according to their theory. Thus, the statement that God is the ‘ Subject of everything ‘ implying that ‘ everything ‘ is the object of God ( the ‘ Eternal Subject ‘ ) and thus exists independently of God evidently appears to be a glaring contradiction in terms, as I see it.
Nevertheless, from the above quote, it’s obvious that Vivekananda regards his God as the ‘ Subject ‘ of his soul, which means that his soul is the object of his God ( ‘ the Eternal Subject ‘ ). Thus, like the chair that has got an independent existence although it’s an object of his, his soul should be able to exist independently of his God too. Thus, with his soul having an independent existence, he should have No difficulty seeing his beloved God, the way I see it. Expressions like ‘ the Essence of your souls ‘ and ‘ the Reality of everything ‘ seem to have No sense.
‘ Thus, I would repeat to you once more, God is neither knowable nor unknowable, ‘ declared Vivekananda. (ibid)
The illustrious sannyasin is evidently outright unaware that his remark adds up to equating the term ‘ knowable ‘ with the term ‘ unknowable ‘: not knowable= not unknowable, hence unknowable= knowable. The genius sannyasin reminds me of a former Chief Justice of India who was once heard to remark that prostitution in India was Not legal Nor illegal. He must have been a disciple of Vivekananda, and so he was totally unmindful of the significance of his remark, i.e. Not legal= Nor illegal means legal= illegal.
The wise sannyasin explained why he considered his God ‘ neither knowable nor unknowable ‘.
‘ He is one with us, and that which is one with us is neither knowable nor unknowable, as our own self. You cannot know your own self; you cannot move it out and make it an object to look at, because you are that and cannot separate yourself from it. ‘ (ibid)
His point is since you canNot separate ‘ your own self ‘ from your body and ‘ move it out and make it an object ‘ outside of your body in order to have a ‘ look at ‘ it, therefore, ‘ your own self ‘, hence God, since your God is Nothing but ‘ your own self ‘, can Never be ‘ knowable ‘. But to know a thing or a person, we Really doN’t at all need to set eyes on it, do we? By looking at something (an object or a person), we have an idea of its look only, Not its essence. People’s true colours are Not written all over their faces or bodies, hence Not in the least visible. Nevertheless, invisible things are Not ‘ unknowable ‘. Air is Not visible ; still, man has discovered its true composition. Nobody has ever seen electricity ; still, man has known a lot about it — so much so that man has made it serve his numerous purposes as if it were man’s most loyal servant. Qualities like Probity, improbity, belief in Silly theism, belief in Secularism, belief in Capitalism or Communism, Philanthropy, misanthropy, Sensibility, stupidity, etc., etc. are Not in the least visible, but None of them are ‘ unknowable ‘. Nor are guys whose essence (character or nature) consists of such qualities are ‘ unknowable ‘, Really. In fact, we can know a man or a woman by knowing their character alone. Knowing someone by sight or by name is Not knowing him or her. Both visible things and invisible things are ‘ knowable ‘, as I see it.
Did Vivekananda use the term ‘ knowable ‘ to mean visible and thus to make a display of his extraordinary command of English vocabulary again? If it were so, then the statement that God ‘ is neither knowable nor unknowable ‘ would mean God is neither visible nor invisible, i.e. God is both visible and invisible, hence visible= invisible. Thus, we’re led to another absurdity. Nevertheless, in that case, by his brilliant line of reasoning, it follows that his God, it being identical with, hence inseparable from, his ‘ own self ‘, can Never be visible to himself or anyone else, and thus the Wise sannyasin proves irreconcilably self-contradictory once again. You should remember that at the very beginning, I quoted him as having said : ‘ I see God, therefore He exists. ‘ This clearly adds up to claiming that the speaker’s beloved God is totally visible to himself.
Was the guy in his Right mind ? I doN’t have any reservations of the Great sannyasin’s saneness Really. Then, what explains such a Silly display of lunatic stupidity by a man with sound mind? As I see it, it’s a stupid guy’s most zealous endeavour to prove a lie True.