Hindu Seer IV

As expected, the old guard stood up! How dare two young non-conformists? But whoa...so much passion to defend a person who had no place to be in the seat of crime, preaching as he has been of religious sermons? Or was it because of this that he needed to have committed the crimes being alleged?Well, we have an advocate here:

I have a question to make:Why did Chinmaya send this message twice, and importantly, with twodifferent subjects?Likewise, why did Saswat send the response twice?Do these poor people think that the gravity of the matter should bebetter conveyed by the number of responses they post?Well, I think IIT Mumbai is not as poor as my home town Varanasi is(where it requires to click the "send" botton several times to senda message; for most of the times it times out), as far as internetis concerned. Thus, the above mentioned duplication is essentiallyintentional. Then, what psychology can be behind such behaviour?Needless to say, such a psychology these days has gripped most ofthe Indian intelligentsia. For example, a few weeks ago a Karnatakacourt and the state police enacted a drama: framing charge-sheetagainst Uma Bharti, ordering her arrest, and backtracking afterwards!My question is: why this drama? Was the judiciary/police efficientenough to ascertain that Uma was innocent, that too within a coupleof days of her surrender? If yes, how come a court has again invokedthe case recently?The root behind all the above behavioural discripancy is "andhatwa",blindness! That is, Inability to know the truth, lack of patience toinvestigate a fact, and hurriedness to show/tell something to thepeople around - however misleading and disastrous may that be.My point is: no Uma or Sankaracharya is above the law, and lawshould take its route. But, while arresting someone, are you sureenough that that someone is indeed guilty? Why cannot such actionswait till completion of intensive investigation? In the above case,a Chief Minister had to concede the chair, and much more politicalchaos took place. Why? No satisfactory answer to this question,because Karnataka government withdrew the case. Then, who willcompensate the personal and public trauma that the lady sufferred,who will compensate for/undo the political turmoil (which had hadbearing on the state administration)?Now, if the Sankarachaeya is released as was Uma, who willcompensate for the defame he was forced to face? Who will compensatefor the mass unrest that this act caused in the mind of millions ofIndians?Nothing wrong in the referred action of TN police if he is foundguilty. But if he is upheld innocent, this blind trend in India willturn too devastating for the common citizen to breath some air.I personally think it is extremely unlikely that Swami JayendraSaraswati is involved in a murder. Because, a Sankaracharya is noPope who could order an "Albigensian Massacre" and still be thehighest religious leader of the World; I hope smart guys likeChinmay, Saswat, Vulcan etc know what it (Albigensian Massacre) was.Neither a Sankaracharya is a magic Guru (Saswat needs to "know"before pointing a finger) nor any goonda can become a Sankaracharya!Unlike the western churches, Indian Religious establishments (notthe fake Ashramas; one has to "know" the difference between myriadsothers and the "dhAma") are unknown to be involved in sodomy, childabuse, murder etc.-- AA