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 two
Likewise, why did Saswat send the response twice?
Do these poor people think that the gravity of the matter should be
better 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 send
a message; for most of the times it times out), as far as internet
is concerned. Thus, the above mentioned duplication is essentially
intentional. Then, what psychology can be behind such behaviour?
Needless to say, such a psychology these days has gripped most of
the Indian intelligentsia. For example, a few weeks ago a Karnataka
court and the state police enacted a drama: framing charge-sheet
against Uma Bharti, ordering her arrest, and backtracking afterwards!
My question is: why this drama? Was the judiciary/police efficient
enough to ascertain that Uma was innocent, that too within a couple
of days of her surrender? If yes, how come a court has again invoked
the case recently?
The root behind all the above behavioural discripancy is “andhatwa”,
blindness! That is, Inability to know the truth, lack of patience to
investigate a fact, and hurriedness to show/tell something to the
people around – however misleading and disastrous may that be.
My point is: no Uma or Sankaracharya is above the law, and law
should take its route. But, while arresting someone, are you sure
enough that that someone is indeed guilty? Why cannot such actions
wait till completion of intensive investigation? In the above case,
a Chief Minister had to concede the chair, and much more political
chaos took place. Why? No satisfactory answer to this question,
because Karnataka government withdrew the case. Then, who will
compensate the personal and public trauma that the lady sufferred,
who will compensate for/undo the political turmoil (which had had
bearing on the state administration)?
Now, if the Sankarachaeya is released as was Uma, who will
compensate for the defame he was forced to face? Who will compensate
for the mass unrest that this act caused in the mind of millions of
Nothing wrong in the referred action of TN police if he is found
guilty. But if he is upheld innocent, this blind trend in India will
turn too devastating for the common citizen to breath some air.
I personally think it is extremely unlikely that Swami Jayendra
Saraswati is involved in a murder. Because, a Sankaracharya is no
Pope who could order an “Albigensian Massacre” and still be the
highest religious leader of the World; I hope smart guys like
Chinmay, 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 (not
the fake Ashramas; one has to “know” the difference between myriads
others and the “dhAma”) are unknown to be involved in sodomy, child
abuse, murder etc.– AA