Mahendranath Gupta recorded his daily interactions with Ramakrishna in his diary, which were subsequently published as Sri-Sri-Ramakrishna-Kathamrta in 5 Volumes in Bengali.
[6] Kripal argues that although Nikhilananda calls it a literal translation, he "substantially altered Gupta's text, combining the five parallel narratives", "as well as deleting some passages which he claimed were of no particular interest to English-speaking readers.".
[12] Lex Hixon writes that the Gospel is "spiritually authentic" and "powerful rendering of the Kathamrita into dignified English.
Religious scholar, Narasingha Sil[19] and Jeffery Kripal[20] argue that Datta's Jivanvrttanta is the most scandalous biography of Ramakrishna, "containing the lurid details of his sadhana as well as his quite suggestive encounters with his patron Mathur."
[25] Scholars Romain Rolland, Isherwood considered Swami Saradananda an authority both as a philosopher and as an historian on Ramakrishna.
[33] Romain Rolland, writing in 1929, said that this work is based on first-hand evidence, analysed in "broad and clear critical spirit".
[2] Max Müller said that he based his book on the testimonies of Swami Vivekananda and several independent witnesses, both favorable and unfavorable to Ramakrishna.
Moreover, these eye-witnesses are not the simple fishermen of the Gospel story; some are great thinkers, learned in European thought and disciplined in its strict school.
[42] Pratap Bhanu Mehta characterized Maharaj's book as "philosophically astute [and] textually scrupulous",[43] a work that defends "Ramakrishna against the charge of an indiscriminate eclecticism on the one hand, or a covert hierarchy on the other.
In each of these four areas, Maharaj both advances an original interpretive thesis and brings Ramakrishna into a dialogue with comparative philosophy and religious practice.