The Transformation from 1 Narendranath to Vivekananda Swami Chetanananda Today we are celebrating a very auspicious occasion, as all of us from all over the world have come here to pay our homage toSwami Vivekananda in connection with his 150th birth anniversary. Chicago is a very, very holy place. Swamiji arrived here on 30 July 1893 and he gave his maiden speech on 11 September 1893. He was Sri Ramakrishna’s “vāṇī mūrti”—that is, his manifested “Voice Form”. Swamiji himself implied this when he said, “All the ideas that I preach are only an aempt to echo his [Ramakrishna'ʹs] ideas."ʺ When I first walked on the shore of Lake Michigan in 1972, Itriedto imagine that Swamiji had nirvikalpa samadhi somewhere around that place. Perhaps when you walk there you also may think of it. There are so many wonderful episodes connected with Swamiji in Chicago. One touching incident comes to my mind. When Swamiji was leaving Chicago for the last time, in 1900, for India, he stayed a few days withtheHale family. On the morning of his departure, Mary Hale came to the Swami'ʹs room and found him sad. His bed appeared to be untouched, and on being 1 This article is based on a lecture given on 9 November 2013 at the Hilton Hotel, Chicago, on the occasion of the convention "Chicago Calling", organized by Swami Ishatmananda. asked the reason, he confessed that he had spent the whole night without sleep. "ʺOh,"ʺ he said, "ʺit is so difficult to break human bonds!"ʺ Swamiji knew that this was the last time he was to see these devoted friends. My topic for today is ‘The transformation from Narendranath to Vivekananda’. Vivekananda was born on 12 January 1863, and was brought up having a Western education which taught him not to accept anything without evidence. He gradually became well versed in both Eastern and Western thought. There are a few important qualities that weseein Narendranath’s life at that time. First, he had a tremendous passionfor Truth. Second, he overflowed with excessive energy -­‐‑-­‐‑ toomuchenergy. Third, he was a rebel. His classmate Brajendranath Sealwrote: “Undeniably a gifted youth, sociable, free and unconventional in manners, a sweet singer, the soul of social circles, a brilliant conversationalist, somewhat bier and caustic, piercing with shafts of a keen wit the shows and mummeries of the world, siing in the scorner'ʹs chair but hiding the tenderest of hearts under that garb of cynicism; altogether aninspired Bohemian but possessing what Bohemians lack -­‐‑-­‐‑ an iron will; somewhat peremptory and absolute, speaking with accents of authority andwithal possessing a strange power of the eye which could hold his listenersin thrall.” This rebel came to Sri Ramakrishna in 1881. As a rebel, he did not like some aspects of Hinduism. First he did not care for the caste system, and he hated child-­‐‑marriage from the boRom of his heart. Healsoabhorred imag(h'"rship, the neglect of women’s education, the exploitation ,y some priests who took ad1antage of the illiteracy and po1erty oflowcaste people. A0ain, he could not ,ear 1arious kinds of superstitions, andthe narrowness and bigotry of Hinduism. And he especially hated hypocrisy. iefore Swam.Ai left for America, a pandit of South India toldhim: IKadāpi na, don’t cross the ocean. mou will ,ecome an outcaste.” iut :.1ekananda ,roke all such superstitions. nuring his youth, his rebellious nature took him to the irahmo Samaj, a socioh)(+.0ious reform mo1ement in India. He found that they did not have a caste system, andtheyhad started a pro0ramme for women’s education. They also emphasized meditation and study, and they were involved in reforming Hinduism. All this he liked. And what was the o,Aect of their meditatio/p Saguna nirakara irahman hh&irahman without a form ,ut with eualities. This, in particular, suited barendra, as he did not care for idol worship at all.Godwith eualities ,ut no form rh&that is also the Christian concept of God. Though formless, God is omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, almighty, all merciful, all forg.1ing, all lo1ing, and so on. This idea of God appealed to him. It is not so easy to change a person like :.1ekananda. He was J3ishtha, drarishtha, ,alishtha, med8J1i hh&well disciplined, strong in mind, strong in ,ody, and had a 0igantic intellect and tremendous will power. Hewas proud of his learning and scientific reasoning, and was firm inmoral, ethical, and spiritual 1alues. And yet this was a man who was 0oing to ,e changed ,y a temple priest who had no formal education! It isamazing how Ramakrishna smashed his ego and his pride in his convictions and learning, and finally changed his whole life. How did theMaster accomplish thisp Oirst, barendra did not ,elieve in SJ;J)$h1ādNqod with form.iut Ramakrishna changed all that. After barendra’s father died in 1884,the family s2tered from po1erty and sometimes starved. It was unbearable for barendranath to see this, as he was then the head of the family. nespite his ,est (torts, he could not find any Ao,. With no other hope, hecameto Ramakrishna and asked him: I9ir, please do something for me. Icannot ,ear it that my mother, ,rothers, and sisters are starving athome.The n.1ine Mother listens to your prayers. Why don’t you pray form(p” Ramakrishna said: “Oh, I prayed to the Mother for you. iut She said that you don’t believe in Her, so She cannot do anything for you.” I9ir, I do not know your Mother.” IAll right! Today is Tuesday, an auspicious day. In the evening you 0o to the temple and whatever you ask my Mother, She will 0.1e ittoyou.” baren knew Ramakrishna was I:J;h9iddha” – perfect in speech. Whatever came from his lips, was true. So that evening he went to the temple.iut what did he pray fo)p He prayed X1e things: IZother, 0.1e me knowled0e, devotion, discrimination, renunciation, and uninterrupted 1ision of mou.” He then returned to the Master and informed him what he had prayed for. Ramakrishna sent him ,ack to the temple and asked him to prayagain. baren again failed. He went three times to the n.1ine Mother ,ut could/T- ask for money or any worldly things. Oinally, Ramakrishna ,lessedhim, saying, Imour family will never s2ter from lack of ordinary foodand clothing.” It was a 0reat 1ictory for Ramakrishna ,ecause barendra accepted uali the Mother, God with form. The Master then taughthima song on the Mother which barendra sang again and again the whole night and then finally went to sleep. The Master knew that barendra would carry his message, which was an $++h./*lus.1e message. And for this reason Ramakrishna 0ave him the experience of other paths so that he would/T- ,e able to form any sect. Second, barendra did not ,elieve in G2)2h1ād hh& the doctrine ofthe 0uru. There is no traditional 0uru in the irahmo Samaj, ,ut ithasa preacher similar to a Christian minister. Later on barendra realized the 1alue of a spiritual teacher. iut at first he even criticized Ramakrishna: I9ir, you are illiterate. I have not come here to learn anything from you.” The Master Aokingly said to the devotees: Ibaren ,ale J7i nirakshara, kintu J7ār akshar Anāna J*hhe hh& baren says I am illiterate ,utIknowthe alphabet. I can sign my name.” met this same barendra later saidto Ramakrishna, I9ir, do you have any medicine that will make meforget e1erythin0 I ha1e learnedp” What a chan0e! A,out his0uru Sri Ramakrishna, he wrote, I9amshaya )J;shasa /J3ha mahāstram yJ7i 0urum sharanam ,hav$h1aidyam naradeva deva Aaya Aaya naradeva hh&I surrender myself to my 0uru, the physician for the malady of this world, and who is the weapon to destroy the 0reatest demon one can think of hh& that is, doubt!” Rama killed the demon Ravana, urishna killed the demon uamsa, and Ramakrishna killed the 0reatest demon in this age hh&thatis, doubt. Thus Narendranath accepted Ramakrishna as his guru. Third, barendra rejected the A1atara-­‐‑vād hh&the doctrine of the avatara. He did not ,elieve that God incarnates as a human ,eing. Onedaythe Master said to barendra: Iqirish says, I am an avatara. What do you think of itp” barendra replied: I9ir, I don’t care for such things. iut he has faith. Let him ,elieve whatever he likes. If I experience anything myself, then I shall let you know.” Later he accepted the Master as an avatara. Onenightin Cossipore barendra went to the Mast()T3 room and silently euestioned whether he was an avatara. The Master immediately remo1ed hisdoubt, saying, “He who was Rama, he who was urishna, is 1erily inthis,ody Ramakrishna.” Moreo1er, at that time barendra actually saw Ramaand urishna in the MasterHs ,ody. Later, in his ihakti mo0a lectures, Swam.Ai talked elaborately about the guru and the avatara. Oourth, Ad1ait$h1ād hh&the doctrine of nondualism. This is a 1ital point. barendra did not ,elieve in the philosophy of Ad1aita. He was a ,eliever in Saguna irahman, God with eualities. According to him, the creator and the created cannot ,e the same. It is absurd, he thought, that a table and the creator of the table are the same. He tried to use reason to understand it, ,ut could not. One day he sarcastically remarked to the Master: IQtis ,lasphemous, for there is no d.terence ,etween such philosophy and atheism. There is no 0reater sin in the world than to think ofoneselfas identical with the Creator. I am God, you are God, these created things are God — what can ,e more absurd! The sages who wrote such things must have ,een insane.” The Master didn’t mind barendra’s outspokenness at all.