I have merely stated what Premesh Maharaj had said about this issue and what has been a traditional way among devotees in their regard for the Sangha Guru. This is not my assertion, therefore. No one literally asserts that anyone other than Thakur is Thakur. So, the said difference between our opinions does not arise after all. Moreover, the direct disciples were of one mind that Swami Vivekananda was Sri Ramakrishna spiritually re-incarnated after the latter's demise. Swami Brahmananda, too, was widely regarded as being one with Thakur. Sri Ramakrishna himself had repeatedly affirmed Narendranath's spiritual identity with him. So, this statement of the essay you have referred to has to be seen in the light of what may be termed 'bhava' and ought not to be literally taken in the so-called scientific sense. That the Presidents of the Order are one with Thakur in their total absorption in him is the purport of Premeshanandaji's epic observation and what a grand perception it was of this doyen of the Ramakrishna Movement. Also, if you read the essay observantly, your doubts will be dispelled for there is ample clarification about this stupendous statement in the very first paragraph itself where the idea has been well amplified. After all, why seek differences between the Sangha Guru and Thakur in this way when Sri Ramakrishna himself has famously said, ''He who looks upon the guru as God shall see the light and he who does not shall scarce advance''? These are subtle ideas seen by seers through the spiritual eye of their awakened selves and we may best believe or deliberate and doubt but may never come to a supreme sense of certitude till we have had similar realizations. Glory unto you for reading the piece, and perceptively too, in your own way and therein lies the glory of man that he can cogitate the constitutional principles of life. May this response be deemed a friendly fruition of a seasoned deliberation and not as a coarse collision of ideas! Jai Ramakrishna!
No comments:
Post a Comment