From what I have seen and read of Vivekânanda and his colleagues, they seem to me honestly bent on doing good work, and I feel the same about the propaganda carried on by Dharmapâla in favour of Buddhism. It is honest, it is unselfish, it is free from juggling. Vivekânanda and the other followers of Râmak_ri_sh_n_a ought, however, to teach their followers how to distinguish between the perfervid utterances of their teacher, Râmak_ri_sh_n_a, an enthusiastic Bhakta (devotee), and the clear and dry style of the Sûtras of Bâdarâya_n_a. The Vedânta spirit is there, but the form often becomes too vague and exaggerated to give us an idea of what the true _Gñ_ânin (knower) ought to be. However, as long as these devoted preachers keep true to the Upanishads, the Sûtras, and the recognised commentaries, whether of Sa_m_kara or of Râmânu_g_a, I wish them all the success which they deserve by their unselfish devotion and their high ideals. My Indian Correspondents. Were I to publish any of the innumerable letters which I receive from unknown correspondents from every part of India, some written in English, others in Sanskrit, they would surprise many readers by showing how like the present political, philosophic, and religious atmosphere in the higher classes of Indian society is to our own. My Indian friends are interested in the same questions which interest us, and they often refer us to their own ancient philosophers who have discussed the same questions many centuries ago. Many of them read and write English perfectly well, though there is a certain bluntness in their questions which would startle us in England. While I am writing these lines, a letter signed by a number of Indian gentlemen is lying on my table, as yet unanswered, and, if the nature of the questions be considered, likely to remain unanswered for some time. To us some of these questions sound certainly very startling, but they are nevertheless interesting, because they show us the problems on which the Indian mind is brooding, and which to many of them are like their daily bread. We ourselves are more inclined to suppress questions of this kind, or to say with Sir Philip Sidney, “Reason cannot show itself more reasonable than to leave off reasoning on things above reason.” To Indian thinkers, however, there seem to be no regions at all which cannot be approached and penetrated by human reason. The questions on which my unknown friends want my answer, and probably expect it by return of post, are:— (1) What is your opinion regarding God and soul? Is the latter a reflection of the former, or is the one quite separate from the other? Athanasius might have answered such a question, but how can I? (2) If both God and soul are said to have been separated from the beginning, then how, when, and whence is the latter afflicted with Karman (acts and their results) which cause sad suffering to each individual soul?