Paramhansa Yogananda was a great spiritual leader who belonged to the Kriya Yoga school whose proponents included such great and eminent spiritual figures as Shyamcharan Lahiri and Yukeswar Giri, claiming their lineage from the legendary Mahavatar Babaji, an immortal soul said to be engaged in the welfare of humanity. His book Autobiography of a Yogi is immensely popular in India and the West. He did a pioneering work after Swami Vivekananda and Swami Abhedananda in spreading Indian spirituality in the West, especially in the Americas, and presented and promoted several Indian spiritual figures in his book. He greatly respected Mahatma Gandhi and his mode of freedom movement - nonviolent means. He opined that India would gain freedom through nonviolent means and, in his book, never shied away from mentioning the same in several places that any act of violence for a nation like India against British imperialism is counterproductive. In his book, he even mentioned a group of revolutionaries (his college mates) who had planned for an armed uprising in 1914, that the revolution would fail and the ship would be confiscated near Diamond Harbour because their path was not right. He apparently specifically told them that the British were the brothers of Indians and, therefore, should not be harmed. He went on to mention that his college mates, after coming out of British prison, realized the futility of the path of violence and joined Mahatma Gandhi's movement.
We are all aware of who planned for the armed uprising in 1914 and what their credentials were. Only the top leaders knew about the plan, not any or every revolutionary. So, it would appear that his mates included some of the topmost revolutionary leaders of that time. Disregarding the factual error in his book or in his prophecy (the ship was not confiscated near Diamond Harbour but near Batavia, thousands of miles away, and only a few revolutionaries joined Gandhiji's nonviolent movement, several of them as a temporary refuge, others, just to buy time from British atrocities before reorganizing), it is astonishing that a realized soul would even advocate such a path! Eminent leaders like Deshbandhu were outright contemptuous of Gandhiji's ambivalence towards the British empire. Subhas Chandra Bose, Bipin Chandra Pal, and many other leaders, including Vithal Bhai Patel, were not in favour of Gandhiji's attitude towards the British. Unfortunately, after Deshbandhu's demise, critics of Gandhiji were increasingly marginalized and found themselves pushed to a corner. Many of them faded into oblivion. The revolutionaries especially had to pay a heavy price. Gradually, nationalist revolutionaries were shunned out of the mainstream movement, and communists acting as overt and covert British agents gained the upper hand. It is doubtful how much of Gandhiji's pacifism worked in actually bringing freedom. Even though the British left "peacefully" (a narrative supported by an enlightened soul like Paramahamsa Yogananda, strangely like other unenlightened and opportunist political leaders of the later day), much of that "peaceful" departure was caused by the fear of a rebellion in the Indian army and navy, as corroborated by the eminent historians. Dr. R. C. Majumdar refuted the claim and debunked the myth of "nonviolence" contributing to India's independence. The statement of Attlee to Justice Phanibhushan Chakrabarty in the Governor's house stands as testimony.
We all know how Swami Vivekananda looked at the British rule and its implications for India. Though he did not bear malice towards ordinary British, he had no qualms in advising Hemchandra Ghosh and other youth to "squash" the British usurpers and invaders. As per Sister Christine, Swamiji even procured arms and ammunition with the help of Josephine Macleod, his foremost American disciple, and tried to foment a rebellion with the help of some of the ruling classes or Maharajas. Swamii maintained a close link with Balangadhar Tilak, and his daughter Sister Nivedita's role in igniting the spark during the early stages is well-known. Holy mother Sri Sarada Devi, who held no illusion about British rule's ill effects, wanted the British to leave and made a statement that had Vivekananda been alive, he would have been put behind bars by the British, and she would not bear such a calamity. She had overtly and covertly supported the freedom movement, including the revolutionary movement, by encouraging them to join the spiritual mainstream. Her only word of caution was to get hold of Thakur and do anything. She went on to predict that the British would be forced to leave India not by their own accord but as a result of a bloody war in the West, becoming weak and incapable of governing India any further. That came to be true.
Granted, it was not easy for any spiritual figure to outright condemn the British. Paramahansa Yogananda was, therefore, not in wrong when he kept his criticism of the British mild. However, what I find surprising is his pacifist tone throughout the book. It seems that he forgot (like Gandhiji) that Sri Krishna delivered the sermons of Gita on a battlefield. His book is heavy on Christian teachings and promotes the Yogis and the gurus who exhibit certain siddhis or spiritual powers that would appeal to the people of the West. Therefore, if one gets to believe that his book was less on spiritual awakening and more in terms of promoting Indian spirituality to the Christians of the West, moulded in a Christian fashion that they would be comfortable with, encouraging a pacifist tone so as not to hurt (deliberately refraining from using the term antagonize) his followers, some of whom were British and others were British sympathizers, one would realize why he adopted a pacifist tone, eulogizing Gandhiji, while maintaining a stoic silence about the other who sacrificed their lives at the altar of freedom.
Now, whether that befits a great spiritual leader is up to the readers to determine!
Comments