Dear Michael,
I see that your on-line journal is giving publicity to the Freudian fabricator Jeffrey Kripal (student of the notorious Freudian sexual reductionist charlatan Wendy Doniger) who projected his own psycho-sexual hang-ups relating to homosexuality from his experiences at a Catholic seminary onto the famous Bengali mystic Ramakrishna in his notorious work “Kali’s Child”. Kripal went to Kolkata’s Ramakrishna Mission and exploited their hospitality and then deliberately mistranslated Bengali words meaning ‘gently touching’, ‘lap’ etc. to mean things like ‘sodomy’ and ‘genitals’ in order to demonize Ramakrishna as a homosexual paedophile and a mystical fraud!!!
I have copied below the appropriate passage from chapter 9 of my forthcoming book:
Doniger’s Freudian Disciples Project Personal Sexual Hang-ups onto Hindu ‘Other’
Kripal projects Catholic paedophilia onto Ramakrishna and presents Vedantic Yoga as vows

We saw in Chapter 7 that the so-called ‘Queen of Hinduism Studies’ in the USA, Wendy Doniger (a.k.a. W. Doniger O’Flaherty) has made her name by peddling racy books full of sexual content given her Freudian misrepresentations of Hinduism. We saw that distinguished Sanskrit scholars have mocked her inaccurate and very misleading translations of Hindu texts. Under Doniger’s guidance at Chicago University, Jeffrey Kripal undertook his PhD on Ramakrishna. Kripal spent time at the Ramakrishna Mission in West Bengal but did not let them see his manuscript prior to publication. Kripal’s PhD research was presented in a book entitled Kali’s Child. This book won the First Book Award from the American Academy of Religion (AAR), an organization in which Doniger and her colleagues hold powerful positions. None of the AAR committee who glorified Kripal’s book was fluent in Bengali. This success landed Kripal a position at Harvard followed by a prestigious Chair at Rice University [24]. Kripal is also associated with the (New Age) Esalen Institute. In his anti-Perennialist conclusions to The Presence of Light, Kapstein states, “Ramakrishna’s disciples, as we know, took great care to clean up his act” [25]. The reference given here is to Kripal’s Kali’s Child. The influential Encyclopedia Britannica even listed Kripal’s book as the top choice for further reading about Ramakrishna [26].
                The Ramakrishna Mission’s Swami Tyagananda and other Bengali scholars who had extensive discussions with Kripal are certain that Kripal simply doesn’t know the Bengali language even though he claims to have read the Bengali documents he cited. When spoken to in Bengali about Bengali culture, Kripal did not understand and could not respond. Coming from the Bengali bhadralok intelligentsia myself, having been brought up with pictures of Ramakrishna, his wife and Vivekananda in our sitting room and my mother’s bedroom, this Freudian distortion of Ramakrishna ‘hits home’. Tyagananda stated [27]:
Kripal’s conclusions come via faulty translations, a wilful distortion and manipulation of sources, combined with a remarkable ignorance of Bengali culture.  ...Kripal’s ignorance of Bengali culture jumps right off the page.  ... [Furthermore,] it’s painfully clear that he also has little knowledge of Sanskrit.
As Pandita Indrani Rampersad states, Kripal asserts that his ‘sexy, seedy and strange’ interpretation of Tantra is authentic. Kripal mistranslated Bengali words such as those for lap, head and touching softly to the English, ‘genitals, phallus and sodomy’, respectively to present Ramakrishna as a homosexual paedophile rather than a true mystic. Tyagananda stated that Kripal may be at his most laughable when he writes that Ramakrishna’s practice of Vedanta consisted of taking the monastic vows and eating rice [28].
I noted in Chapter 3 in regard to Enlightenment and the Innate Capacity argument that, from a scientific perspective using EEG studies etc., Enlightenment resembles a Near-Death state. I pointed out that medical doctors had difficulty detecting a heartbeat in Ramakrishna when absorbed in deepest Samadhi [29]. Anyone familiar with the story of Ramakrishna knows that other monks, jealous of his meditative prowess would beat his unresponsive body when he was so absorbed in Brahman realization! Huston Smith, who has experienced Enlightenment himself using drugs, wrote scathingly of Kali’s Child in the Harvard Divinity Bulletin calling Kripal’s work ‘colonialism updated’{e.m.}[30]. In fact, Kripal’s is an extreme example of the neo-colonial Orientalism prevalent in supposedly ‘Postmodern’ Western academia.
                Kripal responded with the facile argument that his critics were homophobes! In fact, using Kripal’s own statements, a Professor Sil has analysed Kripal’s psychosexual history. Kripal trained at a Catholic seminary where he was ‘forced to explore the interfaces between sexuality and spirituality and felt ‘more than tortured by [his] own psychosexual pathologies. Kripal wrote that he felt that Christian bridal mysticism was unholy given its apparent homoeroticism.; His own ‘religious life was quite literally killing [him]’. As Pandita Rampersad states in Invading the Sacred: An Analysis of Hinduism Studies in the USA, it is quite common for Western scholars to play out their private lives through their “scholarship” (inverted commas mine) about ‘others’. Sarah Caldwell won the prestigious Robert Stoller Award for her writings on the Hindu Goddess. On the basis of a purported quote from one native, Caldwell claimed to have ‘proved’ that homosexual encounters are rampant in Kerala. This seems to be another case of autobiographical, self-projecting works posing as scholarship of an alien culture on the other side of the world which, in the past, could not respond. Paul Courtright admitted candidly that there was no evidence for his (lurid) claims about Hindu deity Ganesa as a symbol of castration etc. But he proceeded to pronounce his Freudian flights of fancy as valid, scholarly interpretations. Western Humanities academia, steeped in Gadamerian Hermeneutic ideology which claims that texts can be read and reinterpreted in any way, cannot prevent such ‘hermeneutic’ methodology becoming just arbitrary readings driven by the academic’s own psychoses [31].
Yours sincerely
Sutapas Bhattacharya