Letters to the editor

Readers’ comments: ‘Comparing Swami Vivekananda with Modi was unnecessary and stupid’

Readers respond to an article arguing that the Ramakrishna Mission founder laid the ideological foundation for the politics of sectarianism and bigotry in India

Like no other

The author has presented a warped account of the ideas of one of the most celebrated philosophers of pre-modern India and has placed him in the same bracket as Narendra Modi to exemplify his misgivings about the present state of the country (“Role model: How Vivekananda laid the foundation for India’s politics of sectarianism”).

“The most ancient order of monks” he refers to does not bear any relation to the Ramakrishna order. Swami Vivekananda was initiated into monkhood well before the foundation of the Ramkrsihna Order in 1886. The order he refers to is the monastic order in which he was initiated.

The words “Hindu nation” and “Hindu race” had a much different connotation than than they do now. The early colonial period, after centuries of Islamic and then English (Christian) rule was a time when Hindus faced an identity crisis. While the author may not hold religion in great esteem (a lot of people don’t) he should at least historically acknowledge the fact that the Swami’s acclaim in the West was marked by revival of nationalistic pride, as Tilak, Gandhi, Tagore and other nationalist leaders have attested to. His portrayal of a sublime religion stemmed from his own belief and knowledge. It is right to be proud of one’s heritage, while never advocating inferiority of any other system.

I agree with the author on his comments on the synthesis of religion and science, though I am well aware that, being a student of medical science, I remain ignorant of philosophy and theology. The trend however is dangerous.

It pains me to find such a flippant article using flimsy arguments, such as the similarities of Narendranath Datta and Modi’s names, or their affinity for being photographed, to justify his criticism. If deploring the communal intolerance was the authors motto, he hardly not have brought Swami Vivekananda into the debate. He is the last person who would have condoned the present anarchy.
I would also appreciate if the author educates us on which major international religion of the present era is historically than Hinduism. – Saikat Prasad Datta


The order of monks that Vivekananda referred to was the ancient Vedantic order of sanyasins, not to the Ramakrishna order. Vivekananda was not quite the fool or the devil he is being made out to be in this write up. – Sanjoy Sankar Guha


It seems that the author is wrongly superimposing Narendra Modi’s attributes on Swami Vivekananda. The author stooped so low that he made personal attacks on the Swami, like his fondness for being photographed. Even Shri Ramakrishna got his photographs taken. What is wrong with that? Conversely, Gandhi or any public figure for that matter does not automatically become great by not looking at the camera.

The author has not even studied Vivekananda’s complete works and instead talks about his Collected Works. A little learning is a dangerous thing, as the adage goes. The author is completely unaware of the Swami’s knowledge and appreciation of whatever is good and praiseworthy in other cultures. The author referred to a letter that Vivekananda wrote to the Raja of Khetri, Ajit Singh, and concluded “The idea of the Middle Ages as an era of Hindu slavery is a central tenet of Hindutva, and ignores developments in architecture, mathematics, the arts and music in those centuries.”

In contrast, Vivekananda got Muslim architecture incorporated in the structure of the temple of his Ishta Devata Shri Ramakrishna at Belur Math, which was constructed under the supervision of Engineer Swami Vijnanananda later on. – Pulak Taraphdar


I think the author is not taking context into account while presenting his views. He is just quoting some lines from Vivekananda’s speeches to establish his argument. But by that logic, if we take bits of Gandhi’s quotes out of context, he will definitely sound racist and sexist. A man goes evolves throughout his life. We can’t take some of Vivekananda’s statements and label him as someone who spreads sectarianism. – Narendra Rautela


We understand your dislike of the prime minister. But please read about Swami Vivekananda’s life, his teachings and the work done by him first before writing something just to please pseudo-seculars. – Soumen Garain


To really understand what Swami Vivekananda was all about, one needs to study his and Ramakrishna Paramahamsa’s life. One needs to have some basic knowledge of the Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta to really understand his ideology.

People are so flustered by Modi’s antics that they’re writing half-baked articles on such an eminent personality just because he wore saffron and spread the message of the Upanishads, or because the prime minister chose to glorify him on his birth centenary!

Of course the invasions have devastated our knowledge and culture which is a fact. Some religions and war-mongering cultures have destroyed so much of our knowledge and heritage time and again! Indians are so conditioned to a distorted history that they find it difficult to accept what really happened. But as its name suggests, the Sanatan Dharma has managed to live one through everything.

This is a shallow interpretation of Vivekananda’s words. When he said “worlds oldest order of monks,” it was a much deeper reference, to the ancient rishis who came up with the Advaita philosophy, a legacy he continued. And if you understand what Advaita Vedanta is, you will clearly see how even associating the word “sectarianism” with his philosophy is a joke and associating Modi with him is pure stupidity.

Modern Hindus should be proud of the fact that what modern neuroscience, consciousness studies and quantum physics are now trying to grapple with, our ancient rishis had already discovered ages ago (including the fact that earth is round). It’s sad that most Hindus know nothing ( or don’t bother to know anything) about their accomplishments and heritage. – Prasun Chatterjee


Shahane’s article on Vivekananda is a fun read. He should go after Ramakrishna next. Then Tagore and Satyendra Nath Bose. – Sugata Mitra


Thank you for this insightful article on Swami Vivekananda. It shall stay with me for a long time. – Afsar Raza


Whoever has criticised Swami Vivekananda doesn’t seem to have comprehended his words. The Swami’s words and messages were for humanity and not for a particular religion. – Omprakash Singh


This article reflects bias and hatred. Your extreme narrow mindedness shows in the lack of empathy in whatever little you have read of Swami Vivekananda. Please go through Chaturvedi Badrinath’s book on him, which is very factual.
Please read The Secret by Rhonda Byrne or The Science of Getting Rich; you will hate to see Swami Vivekananda’s indirect influence here too. – Ramakant Tiwari


The author has not understood the meaning and context of Swami Vivekananda’s Chicago speech. He spoke for all of humanity. The audience weren’t fools to clap for him for five minutes on an international platform. You seem to be only attacking the Right-wingers. – Muthuramanan


I was drawn to this article because I have read books written by Swamiji and have not depended on second-hand commentaries alone.

Normally I would turn a blind eye to such ignorance and let the natural course prevail. It is fair to assume that the piece doesn’t deserve the reader’s precious attention because of its incompetence and insinuations. But it’s important to address this.

Let’s talk about the Chicago speech. The metaphors of language and the understanding of Swami Vivekananda’s ideals are lost on the writer. To conclude that he was misleading the audience by distorting facts is not just a myopic take on the wordings but also an example of terrible oversight.

Sadhus with or without affiliation were a great source of inspiration for Swami Vivekananda, for they were single-minded in their devotion towards the soul. To seek truth, serve fellow humans through a lifetime of action was what Sadhus were, and it is this order of (sadhus) monks that he alluded to when he spoke of representing them.

Hinduism being the mother of religions is a statement that is not to be interpreted through the lens of chronological accuracy because what the Swami meant (and this you can only understand if you follow his first-hand writings and works) was that Hinduism advocates values that are universal, that go beyond the relationships of individuals towards fellow humans and material objects, and advocates values that are timeless because there is no ultimatum for good deeds nor an expiry date of values – with these qualifications of universalism and timelessness as a background, “mother of religions” is a handy moniker at best.

It is clear that the writer has not introspected on the character of Vivekananda. As a boy he was feisty and audacious. Very early on he identified fear as our greatest enemy and his mantr was that fear should be vanquished by nurturing body, mind and soul. Overcome fear head-on with the profound powers of the soul he would have thought looking straight into cameras. The image that the public loves is the image that lasts, and Swami Vivekananda’s unbridled love for life comes through, even if one had taken the photograph from another angle. He did not have a team of publicists who have ensured he had the right public image, the one that lasted was the image that people love.

Inferences from his private letters have been made without taking into account context, and coming to conclusions without reading them in whole is deplorable. Swami Vivekananda’s ideals were about service to the soul and one’s faith or religious leanings had no place in this path. Religion was not an agenda for him, serving fellow humans was, whatever be their affiliation – and even as you read this, his mission is serving people of all faith. – Abhi Sen

We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Behind the garb of wealth and success, white collar criminals are hiding in plain sight

Understanding the forces that motivate leaders to become fraudsters.

Most con artists are very easy to like; the ones that belong to the corporate society, even more so. The Jordan Belforts of the world are confident, sharp and can smooth-talk their way into convincing people to bend at their will. For years, Harshad Mehta, a practiced con-artist, employed all-of-the-above to earn the sobriquet “big bull” on Dalaal Street. In 1992, the stockbroker used the pump and dump technique, explained later, to falsely inflate the Sensex from 1,194 points to 4,467. It was only after the scam that journalist Sucheta Dalal, acting on a tip-off, broke the story exposing how he fraudulently dipped into the banking system to finance a boom that manipulated the stock market.


In her book ‘The confidence game’, Maria Konnikova observes that con artists are expert storytellers - “When a story is plausible, we often assume it’s true.” Harshad Mehta’s story was an endearing rags-to-riches tale in which an insurance agent turned stockbroker flourished based on his skill and knowledge of the market. For years, he gave hope to marketmen that they too could one day live in a 15,000 sq.ft. posh apartment with a swimming pool in upmarket Worli.

One such marketman was Ketan Parekh who took over Dalaal Street after the arrest of Harshad Mehta. Ketan Parekh kept a low profile and broke character only to celebrate milestones such as reaching Rs. 100 crore in net worth, for which he threw a lavish bash with a star-studded guest-list to show off his wealth and connections. Ketan Parekh, a trainee in Harshad Mehta’s company, used the same infamous pump-and-dump scheme to make his riches. In that, he first used false bank documents to buy high stakes in shares that would inflate the stock prices of certain companies. The rise in stock prices lured in other institutional investors, further increasing the price of the stock. Once the price was high, Ketan dumped these stocks making huge profits and causing the stock market to take a tumble since it was propped up on misleading share prices. Ketan Parekh was later implicated in the 2001 securities scam and is serving a 14-years SEBI ban. The tactics employed by Harshad Mehta and Ketan Parekh were similar, in that they found a loophole in the system and took advantage of it to accumulate an obscene amount of wealth.


Call it greed, addiction or smarts, the 1992 and 2001 Securities Scams, for the first time, revealed the magnitude of white collar crimes in India. To fill the gaps exposed through these scams, the Securities Laws Act 1995 widened SEBI’s jurisdiction and allowed it to regulate depositories, FIIs, venture capital funds and credit-rating agencies. SEBI further received greater autonomy to penalise capital market violations with a fine of Rs 10 lakhs.

Despite an empowered regulatory body, the next white-collar crime struck India’s capital market with a massive blow. In a confession letter, Ramalinga Raju, ex-chairman of Satyam Computers convicted of criminal conspiracy and financial fraud, disclosed that Satyam’s balance sheets were cooked up to show an excess of revenues amounting to Rs. 7,000 crore. This accounting fraud allowed the chairman to keep the share prices of the company high. The deception, once revealed to unsuspecting board members and shareholders, made the company’s stock prices crash, with the investors losing as much as Rs. 14,000 crores. The crash of India’s fourth largest software services company is often likened to the bankruptcy of Enron - both companies achieved dizzying heights but collapsed to the ground taking their shareholders with them. Ramalinga Raju wrote in his letter “it was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten”, implying that even after the realisation of consequences of the crime, it was impossible for him to rectify it.

It is theorised that white-collar crimes like these are highly rationalised. The motivation for the crime can be linked to the strain theory developed by Robert K Merton who stated that society puts pressure on individuals to achieve socially accepted goals (the importance of money, social status etc.). Not having the means to achieve those goals leads individuals to commit crimes.

Take the case of the executive who spent nine years in McKinsey as managing director and thereafter on the corporate and non-profit boards of Goldman Sachs, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines, and Harvard Business School. Rajat Gupta was a figure of success. Furthermore, his commitment to philanthropy added an additional layer of credibility to his image. He created the American India Foundation which brought in millions of dollars in philanthropic contributions from NRIs to development programs across the country. Rajat Gupta’s descent started during the investigation on Raj Rajaratnam, a Sri-Lankan hedge fund manager accused of insider trading. Convicted for leaking confidential information about Warren Buffet’s sizeable investment plans for Goldman Sachs to Raj Rajaratnam, Rajat Gupta was found guilty of conspiracy and three counts of securities fraud. Safe to say, Mr. Gupta’s philanthropic work did not sway the jury.


The people discussed above have one thing in common - each one of them was well respected and celebrated for their industry prowess and social standing, but got sucked down a path of non-violent crime. The question remains - Why are individuals at successful positions willing to risk it all? The book Why They Do It: Inside the mind of the White-Collar Criminal based on a research by Eugene Soltes reveals a startling insight. Soltes spoke to fifty white collar criminals to understand their motivations behind the crimes. Like most of us, Soltes expected the workings of a calculated and greedy mind behind the crimes, something that could separate them from regular people. However, the results were surprisingly unnerving. According to the research, most of the executives who committed crimes made decisions the way we all do–on the basis of their intuitions and gut feelings. They often didn’t realise the consequences of their action and got caught in the flow of making more money.


The arena of white collar crimes is full of commanding players with large and complex personalities. Billions, starring Damien Lewis and Paul Giamatti, captures the undercurrents of Wall Street and delivers a high-octane ‘ruthless attorney vs wealthy kingpin’ drama. The show looks at the fine line between success and fraud in the stock market. Bobby Axelrod, the hedge fund kingpin, skilfully walks on this fine line like a tightrope walker, making it difficult for Chuck Rhoades, a US attorney, to build a case against him.

If financial drama is your thing, then block your weekend for Billions. You can catch it on Hotstar Premium, a platform that offers a wide collection of popular and Emmy-winning shows such as Game of Thrones, Modern Family and This Is Us, in addition to live sports coverage, and movies. To subscribe, click here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Hotstar and not by the Scroll editorial team.