Jump to content

Shri Ramakrishna, an Udasi Sant? Maybe!


Guest Javanmard
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Javanmard

Gurfateh

Needless to introduce to you Shri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and his disciple Swami Vivekananda whose movement had a tremendous influence not only in India (specially Bengal) but also in the West. Thomas Mann, Romain Rolland, Cristopher Isherwood, Aldous Huxley, Albert Camus and Simone Weil were deeply influenced by the teachings of the saint of Dakshineshwar.

My research ahs brought me to an interesting discovery confirmed by Bengali and other scholars.

Ramakrishna's Vedant gurdev was a Panjabi Sant called Totapuri. Swami Vivekananda says that he was a dasnami naga but I always had serious doubts about it. Now some Udasis live like nagas and even wear the title Puri. Ramakrishna not only used to repeat Vahiguru mantar but also had a great following amongst the Sikh soldiers in Calcutta who considered him as one of their saints. Udasis and Nirmale used to visit him. Bengali scholars have insisted on the fact that Shri Ramakrishna uses terms never used in Bengal such as Satguru, simran, Vahiguru etc...

If really that's true then Swami Vivekananda and his Ramakrishna Mission are wrong in what they believe to be their maryada i.e. dasnami.

On top of that the Ramakrishna Mission has been cutting certain passages from the Shri Ramakrishna Kathamrita dealing with Tantra and other "obscure" teachings. I think these Bengalis are afraid to admit that their biggest saint was in fact an Udasi Sikh. :twisted:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BikramjitSingh

My research ahs brought me to an interesting discovery confirmed by Bengali and other scholars.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Your research ??

Check the entry for Tota Puri in the Sikh Encyclopaedia. It contains most of your 'research' and a lot more on Tota Puri and the fact that he was Ramakrishna's religious mentor.

Btw when you gonna re-invent the wheel :)

GurFateh

Bikramjit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Javanmard

The Encyclopaedia says that he was a dasnami which is totally untrue. Dasnami never give diksha to grahistis whereas Udasis do. Ramakrishna remained a grahisti all his life. He could never have been a dasnami sannyasi and even less a naga. Udasis (chota akhara Kankhal) will tell you that we was part of the Udasi sampradaya. Some people have identified him as Baba Biram Das but there are still some uncertainties. There is an article in the SIkh review entitled Udasis: Torchbearers of Sikhi which confirms my statement. This was again confrimed with my dialogue with Bengali scholar Shubhajit Dasgupta who showed to me that the words Vahiguru, Satguru, Udasi etc... were used by Shri Ramakrishna and that he was himslef a grihasti Udasi. Swami Vivekananda actually just made his own organisation without taking Ramakrishna's Udasi background into account. Udasi Totapuri never believed in murtian whereas dasnami do. Ramakrishna's teaching were much closer to Sikhi than Advaita Vedanta. In fact the Sikh soldiers of Calcutta used to mata tek Shri Ramakrishna because they considered to be one of our saints. This is the present stand of Bengali scholars on the issue.

The Sikh encyclopaedia is only repeating the official version of things as given by the Ramakrishna Mission and it is certainly not my only reference as some one ( :| ) here seems to imply...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BikramjitSingh

Lallesvari

I always have a good laugh at your attempts to highlight your 'research'. Most of it is culled from the works of others as I have shown before. You seem to be able to quote many texts but never have then on hand when push come to shove in order to prove your theories.

As for the Sikh Review article 'confirming' your statement. It is you who is confirming it. !! Only someone as pompous as you would think that the works of others confirm your 'research'

GurFateh

Bikramjit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I don't have much knowledge about the topic being discussed, but I was confused by a few things so I decided to post.

Even if Ramakrishna was an Udasi, how does that affect us? I mean, Udasi's believe in austerities and celibacy yes? How is that relevant to Sikhi today? We aren't instructed to remain celibate and so on. To be honest, Udasi's seem pretty selfish to me, they can't be too bothered about helping other people or women's spirituality if they believe in isolating themselves from the world.

I think the reason why most people believe Sikhism was influenced by their religion or sect order is because Sikhi contains the concentrated form of truth which is present in every religion in some degree, but not completely. So the similarity is distinct because it's so pure and true that people latch on to that straight away.

However, we have been instructed to maintain a particular lifestyle and image as Guru Gobind Singh Ji's Sikhs and remain distinct from other sects and religions. So, why waste time arguing about whether these people were Sikhs or not? I mean, sometimes I feel half the non-Sikhs I know can be called Sikhs because they display many good qualities Amritdhari Sikhs don't even possess.

A Sikh is a learner, a disciple, and that term can be used for anyone wishing to submit to a Guru, drop Manmat and follow Gurmat.

Apologies for anything I have said which is incorrect, I just had to let it out :oops:

Gurfateh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I thought the whole reason for a debate forum was to debate. This attack on Udasis is appauling calling them

Udasi's seem pretty selfish to me, they can't be too bothered about helping other people or women's spirituality if they believe in isolating themselves from the world.

This seems most like a most fanatical and bigoted statement to me. Not all Udasis are celibate or live in jungles and as Lallesh pointed out Ramakrishna ji was a grishtee Udasi as many Udasis are. Udasis have been vital to the Khalsa Panth from the very beginning.

It was Mahant Kirpal Das Udasi (in whose memory a Gurdwara is situated near Paunta Sahib looked after by 2 Nihang Singhs) who fought side by side with Guru Gobind Singh and was told that the Udasis would always be welcome as part of the Panth by Dasmesh Pitta.

It was an Udasi Sadhu called Mahant Laal Dass Udasi (Pg 6 'Gurbani Paath Darsha') who helped Panth-rattan, Sant-Giani Gurbachan Singh Ji 'Khalsa' Bhindrawale to develop his love for Sikhi and encouraged Baba Ji to become the diamond of the panth that Baba Ji turned out to be.

It was an Udasi sadhu who spotted the divine light in Baba Ishar Singh Rara Sahib Wale.

Udasis have been vital to the spiritual and physical progress of the Panth for many centuries. Anmol Bhenji please do not defame these Mahaan Sadhus and protectors of Dharma as 'selfish.' Bhen ji I ask you humbly to do more research into the Udasis Samparda before you call the Udasi Samparda 'selfish'.

God bless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UDHASIS AND KHALSA>> ONE ORIGIN AGHORI PANTH.. AKAAAL

:P

if the only way to be spiritual in sikhi is to be Gristi (married) then what about all these celbate sant mahapurshis.. does sikhi not cater for the ones who wish to remain single..

and ps lol at totapuri.. what a name.. you sure he was a celbate? (jokes no disrespect to anyone.. )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...