Bertrand Russel on Tagore's Brahmoism

[jagannath Chatterjee]

Many Tagore fans consider him to be a great philosopher.

In 1913  (in a letter to Ottoline Morrell, June 19,1913 after hearing
Tagore's lecture on 'The realisation of Brahma' (From Sadhana))
Bertrand Russell,  wrote disparagingly

"Here I am back from Tagore's lecture, after walking most of the way
home. It was unmitigated rubbish,  cut-and-dried conventional stuff
about the river becoming one with the Ocean and man becoming one with
Brahma. The man is sincere and in earnest but merely rattling old dry
bones. I spoke to him before the lecture afterwards I avoided him."

He also wrote:

'I regret I can not agree with Tagore. His talk about the infinite is
vague nonsense. The sort of language that is admired by many Indians
unfortunately does not, in fact, mean any thing at all.'

Jagannath

[biswajit dutta-2]

Dear Mr. Chatterjee ,
Are you also alluding that Tagore was nonsensical ?  This mail refers to an opinion of Bertrand  Russel only .  Each is entitled to his or her opinion  . However Russel need not be assumed to be the last word on the subject . Tagore was an icon with a massive body of work to support his credentials . You have to provide us more solid grounds to debunk the so called Tagore "myth" or his larger than life status . It's no mean task , Mr. Jagannath Chatterjee .
Regards,
Biswajit Dutta

--- On Sat, 20/12/08, jagannath chatterjee <jagannath.chatterjee@...> wrote:
From: jagannath chatterjee <jagannath.chatterjee@...>
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Bertrand Russel on Tagore's Brahmoism
To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
Date: Saturday, 20 December, 2008, 8:07 AM










   
            Many Tagore fans consider him to be a great philosopher.



In 1913  (in a letter to Ottoline Morrell, June 19,1913 after hearing

Tagore's lecture on 'The realisation of Brahma' (From Sadhana))

Bertrand Russell,  wrote disparagingly



"Here I am back from Tagore's lecture, after walking most of the way

home. It was unmitigated rubbish,  cut-and-dried conventional stuff

about the river becoming one with the Ocean and man becoming one with

Brahma. The man is sincere and in earnest but merely rattling old dry

bones. I spoke to him before the lecture afterwards I avoided him."



He also wrote:



'I regret I can not agree with Tagore. His talk about the infinite is

vague nonsense. The sort of language that is admired by many Indians

unfortunately does not, in fact, mean any thing at all.'



Jagannath


     

   
   
       
         
       
       








       


       
       


      Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/

[bhatta_jayanta]

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., biswajit dutta
<bis_dutta2000@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Chatterjee ,
> Are you also alluding that Tagore was nonsensical ?  This mail
refers to an opinion of Bertrand  Russel only .  Each is entitled to
his or her opinion  . However Russel need not be assumed to be the
last word on the subject . Tagore was an icon with a massive body of
work to support his credentials . You have to provide us more solid
grounds to debunk the so called Tagore "myth" or his larger than life
status . It's no mean task , Mr. Jagannath Chatterjee .
> Regards,
> Biswajit Dutta
>
> --- On Sat, 20/12/08, jagannath chatterjee
<jagannath.chatterjee@...> wrote:

> From: jagannath chatterjee <jagannath.chatterjee@...>
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Bertrand Russel on Tagore's Brahmoism
> To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
> Date: Saturday, 20 December, 2008, 8:07 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    
>             Many Tagore fans consider him to be a great philosopher.
>
>
>
> In 1913  (in a letter to Ottoline Morrell, June 19,1913 after hearing
>
> Tagore's lecture on 'The realisation of Brahma' (From Sadhana))
>
> Bertrand Russell,  wrote disparagingly
>
>
>
> "Here I am back from Tagore's lecture, after walking most of the way
>
> home. It was unmitigated rubbish,  cut-and-dried conventional stuff
>
> about the river becoming one with the Ocean and man becoming one with
>
> Brahma. The man is sincere and in earnest but merely rattling old dry
>
> bones. I spoke to him before the lecture afterwards I avoided him."
>
>
>
> He also wrote:
>
>
>
> 'I regret I can not agree with Tagore. His talk about the infinite is
>
> vague nonsense. The sort of language that is admired by many Indians
>
> unfortunately does not, in fact, mean any thing at all.'
>
>
>
> Jagannath
>
>
>      
>
>    
>    
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>       Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to

http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/
>
Actually, I am not surprised at the disparaging words of Bertrand
Russell. He would have said the same thing about any Protestant
minister giving a sermon. Whatever stature Rabindranath has, he was
not a professional philosopher but in a way a religious teacher, a
minister, an acharya speaking from the pulpit. Do not forget that
Sadhana is an English reworking and partly summary of the many Bengali
sermons Rabindranath had delivered at the Santiniketan Brahmo Mandir
among others. So Sadhana is a collection of Brahmo Samaj sermons by
one of its most  talented members. Mr Russell was looking forward to
analytic philosophy and got a liberal Hindu sermon instead. Nothing
very surprising has happened here, I feel. When Rabindranath spoke in
the Netherlands, the halls could not even hold the audience. The Dutch
religious Romantic poet Frederik van Eeden understood very well that
Rabindranath was presenting a spiritual message to the West, not a
philosophical one.