How Swami Vivekananda won over America
Swami Vivekananda's famous speech in Chicago at the Parliament of Religions played a key role in spreading Hindu philosophy in the West.
On Swami Vivekananda's 149th birth anniversary, Shashi Shekhar reconstructs the Indian spiritual leader's nearly decade-long stay in the US from a collage of original newspaper clippings that give a first-hand account of impressions of his life and teachings while in America.
A decade back on a first visit to the American City of Chicago, I was overcome by a desire to visit the hall where Swami Vivekananda had made his famous speech almost a century before.
Back then the Internet was not quite the powerhouse of information that it is today. There was very little information to go by to track down where exactly that speech was delivered and if there was any memorial at all of the events from that last decade of that Century.
More recently Swami Vivekananda's visit to the United States was brought forth to the mind while listening to a speech by Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi who sought to give a new meaning to the date September 11 marking the day when Swami Vivekananda delivered that famous speech in Chicago.
Thus began a digital quest to reconstruct the events of the 1890s during Swami Vivekananda's visit and stay in the United States. Thanks to the digital news archives of The New York Times gives some glimpses of his stay in the New York area. One also gains a peek into events that perhaps few are familiar with in the years leading up to the Swami's passing away and its immediate aftermath.
Most of the newspaper clippings are from the year 1893 when the Parliament of Religions was held in Chicago. In a curtain raiser that appeared in the Chicago Tribune I t was interesting to note how the local clergy viewed the event as being no threat to Christianity, but an opportunity to witness, as the report put it, 'the grandest successes and the most pathetic failures in the highest plane of human endeavor.
Misconception By Famous Philosopher About Philosophy - News
Swami Vivekananda's famous speech in Chicago at the Parliament of Religions played a key role in spreading Hindu philosophy in the West. On Swami Vivekananda's 149th birth anniversary, Shashi Shekhar reconstructs the Indian spiritual leader's nearly
Nagarjuna was one of the most distinguished Indian Buddhist philosophers. His treatise on “Sunyathava” or emptiness which he claims is not a philosophy but which appears to be a negation of the various interpretations by the various schools of Buddhism
What sort of philosophical view is this? - アマゾンショッピングパートナー
This is the philosophy I follow. What would it be classified as, and what are your thoughts?
- you can’t prove or refute anything,
You can have empirical “evidence” supporting a proposition, but you’ll never be able to prove it. Due to the anomalous nature of the universe, we’ll never really know whether empirical evidence is actually valid on a universal scale. We’re simply far too ignorant! What might seem to be supporting a proposition may not always be the case. The cause of something could well be based upon other phenomena or causes. For example, many would consider water to be essential to our survival. The proof is that without water, humans die. But how do they know that they don’t die just by coincidence? Perhaps there could be a giant incomprehensible fruitcake that zaps and kills people out of spontaneity, and the only people who have been killed by the fruitcake were the people who lacked water in their bodies. Couldn’t it just be a coincidence? It a ridiculous proposition, but it’s certainly possible. Another example, on Earth, if you drop a pen, it will fall to the ground. A person might perceive this as proof of gravity, but it doesn’t necessarily make it so. How does the person know that there isn’t an invisible flying pixie by his head causing the pen to fall? Clearly, it’s a ridiculous proposition, however it’s still possible! How do you prove that the computer screen you’re staring at right now exists? It could be a fabrication of your own mind. So I’m suggesting that you can’t prove anything (not yet anyway). And even if you did somehow manage to prove something, it could just be a figment of your imagination, rendering your proof irrelevant to the truth in existence. So we can never really be certain about the absolute truth of something. As such, you can’t refute anything either. Due to our limited knowledge of the universe, there could quite possibly be other causes resulting in the nature of a phenomenon. Well what if I came to propose that there is a giant invisible car floating around in your room right now? It’s completely intangible and undetectable by human comprehension, so as far as we know, the car doesn’t exist in our minds. But that doesn’t actually render it non-existent does it? Just because we have no perception of it, doesn’t mean it’s not there! So perhaps you’d like to try to disprove this notion. You can’t can you? Another example, try disproving this equation: 1+ 4 = 2. You might try refuting it through the fundamental laws of mathematics, but how do we know that the mathematical laws as we know aren’t false on a universal scale?