Here Charitable Individualism is the key!… nothing less.

The body blow that INDRANI Mukherjea has dealt to the Feminist agenda, of forwarding the innocent lamb taken to slaughter by the macho and merciless men, seems immense.

Seems, the forwarders of the Feminist agenda in the path mentioned above, may be have to stick to such theories in respect of rural women, whose menfolk are still treating their women as chattels. Not anymore, the women of means and those raised in cities.

I can understand every strand of the epic of INDRANI Mukherjea, except for the way she had USED Sanjeev Khanna! The guy says his weakness is for his biological daughter through INDRANI!  So he had to acquiesce with INDRANI ‘s whims, which has ultimately led to him becoming an alleged murderer!

Peter claims oblivion and he has good reason not wanting to know all the past of a woman with such a super past! Vir Sanghvi, has bowled a googly by stating that Indrani’s kids were fathered by her step father! Why Vir Sanghvi couldn’t have wondered that Ms. Indrani could have possibly lied to him also, is a mystery!

Are they portraying INDRANI as a mega villi, as she is not there to defend herself? Are her ex-colleagues settling age old scores? Why are they jumping in and adding their own opinions which do not have anything germane to the murder on hand.

SHEENA, is dead, with no evidence of her body, instead of lighting a candle for the disappeared SHEENA,  everyone is baying for immediate justice Of RETRIBUTION on INDRANI !

Arnab Goswami, initially made it seem as if Peter Mukeherjea was his wife’s daughter’s keeper, and as if Peter owed a duty to tell all and sundry, especially the nosy Arnab, about all he knew, of all these women and men in Indrani’s life! As if , Peter ought to have known !

Are we rendering to our CONSTITUTION our due? Are individuals like Peter, merely because of their association with a woman accused of murder, to forgo all their RIGHTS , to silence, to defend one’s spouse, to presume innocence till proven guilty, and come to the ALTAR OF ARNAB GOSWAMI, and make a clean breast of all that they might have known?

Media also has to circumscribe to its limits. We in India have have gotten rid of the Jury Trial, as PERVERSE FINDINGS by the Jury had become a true bane to the administration of Justice.

Now with the ilk of Arnab we have brought back jury trial by media! As it is, no one knows what Rights an individual has, forget about exercising those! In this confusion, the voluble and disruptive Arnab has declared himself the high priest, into the slippery path of slavery in the name of EXTORTING A CONFESSION!

Let us return to sanity and let the Police collect the evidence and allow the courts to determine if the police had done its duty or not! Let there be order and decency in our discourse. SHEENA ain’t gonna come back and I am sure that the Mumbai police would bring out the best possible evidence.

When Peter the chiefest Apostle of Jesus was asked by Jesus to come walking on water in the boisterous sea, Peter without a thought, jumped out of the boat he was in and started walking towards Jesus. But, after a few strides on the sea, Peter started to sink and started shouting for help towards Jesus. Jesus lifts him up and asks a superb question: PETER, WHY DID YOU DOUBT? 

In Peter Mukherjea’s case, the question to be asked is : PETER, WHY DIDN’T YOU DOUBT? 

Peter Mukherjea has been accused of having been blinded by his love for his wife INDRANI MUKHERJEA, who is the main suspect in the disappearance of SHEENA BORA, who is stated to be the uterine daughter of INDRANI Mukherjea through one of those classic cases of exemplifying the Shakespearean SHE HAD A CHILD TO HER CRADLE BEFORE SHE HAD A HUSBAND TO HER BED! 

It is not as much as she had a child, rather children, two in the last count, but the fact that she is stated to have signified them to be her siblings instead of offsprings, which is intriguing. INDRANI doesn’t seem to have owned up to her own acts, even after hitting her forties! 

But that’s her choice, but when she is the main suspect in the murder of another human being, it is no more a family affair. To complicate matters, the disappeared SHEENA, was in a relationship with Peter’s son through his earlier marriage. 

In all these relational melee, Peter was willing to believe everything that INDRANI was feeding Peter with! 

All this is normal. But what is most interesting is that the vocally disruptive Arnab Goswami seems to be milking the media TRPs with his heavy duty analysis and talking sometimes like a DGP and at times talking like the Chief Justice of Asia! Arnab Goswami is getting panelists in batches and enjoying his high credibility and decibels!

I wonder if Arnab thinks that all his shouting would make sure that the police does their job without any let! I like that zeal with which Arnab Goswami suspects facts and launches on his hypothesis portraying everyone except him as a villain! 

Just five days back he had named and shamed  a guy in a matter where he called the guy who was alleged by a young girl for some misdemeanour as a Pervert! 

Arnab moves on calling all and sundry with the flavour of the moment! Lives for the moment, what an enlightened person! I can’t imagine a world minus Arnab! 

But why is he after Peter? God knows! But in Arnab’s case: THIS TOO SHALL PASS AWAY! 

One woman’s word!

Since Macaulay formulated the Indian Penal Code and subsequent to the adoption of the same, the offences had been defined clearly, but the proof of EVIDENCE of the act done or not done, depended on WITNESSES! 

So if there aren’t any witnesses, there would be ALLEGATIONS, but no proof, unless out of contrition, the accused herself/himself pleads guilty of the alleged offence. 

Essentially, therefore, LACK OF WITNESSES, became the single largest reason for discharge for lack of evidence. Besides real lack of witnesses, sometimes the willing witnesses are threatened or offered inducement to turn hostile . This is the second reason for acquittals! 

More than all these, is the lack of belief in the system to control, punish and give succour to the victims, which leads to NON-REPORTING of the offences committed, which do not have witnesses. 

In the recent episode of a girl who had alleged ‘lewd remarks’ by a man of 29 years coupled with an unsolicited offer by him to drop her at her place while crossing a road, is another instance where no witness has come forward to confirm what the girl has alleged. 

But does that mean, if the event had happened the way as narrated by the girl the man should be allowed to go scotfree in anticipation of lack of evidence? I THINK NOT. 

The man has to be brought and told of the allegations and asked for his explanation. Who knows, he might confess and be contrite. If he denies, then to look for evidence which is INDEPENDENT, would arise. To defend the man even before confronting him with the allegations against him, is anticipation of human nature to resist charges and not trust in the system.

It is not merely a case of one woman’s word against a man, it is an unprovoked assault on a human being. That’s the way to look at it. 

For better evidence, since the numbers of cops patrolling the streets have dwindled and the numbers of humans walking on streets have increased, it is very important that powerful live cc TV recordings are made and stored for substantial period of time. 

Allowing all these one person’s word against another, to lead to lack  of evidence should be denied, not out of naming and shaming, which can disturb the equilibrium of the society, and more independent evidences made available through cc TV s and people video graphing instances as clips, for evidentiary value! 

In the jails in Tamil Nadu, as a means of suffusing serving convicts with Hope after sentence, especially long ones, yearly some of the ex-convicts who had been rehabilitated would be brought to the sports day conducted in jails. In the underlying Christian tradition of REJOICING over a lost and found case, these successfully rehabilitated autre foi convicts were showcased by the Jail administration before the serving convicts! 

HOPE is instilled in the minds of the convicts that , even they have hope if they could serve out their sentences and start afresh! 

In the recently concluded Beijing Athletic World Championship, out of the nine finalists on the 100 metres sprint, four were EX-DOPERS! Those who had stayed out and served the sentences imposed! They were JUSTIN GATLIN, TYSON GAY, MIKE RODGERS and ASAFA POWELL! 

Still none made it to the top! It was USAIN BOLT, who pipped Justin Gatlin by one hundredth of a second. The ex doper had a better start, naturally the doper’s reflexes seem to have been better! 

Sports and Doping, do not mix. Further, the glory that ought to have come to a diligent and talented non doper is smuggled by a masked doper and a worthy guy is denied his time in the sun. Whereas, like Lance Armstrong, after many seasons out of contrition or discovery or ratting by a fellow doper, facts trickle out. Meanwhile the cream of glory and endorsement monies had been stashed away by the dopers. Later, they, on the advice of the brands they promoted on the guise of clean sportsmen, would turn repentant, and like Zacchaeus, return fourfold out of the then tenfold multiplied assets for charity and spend the rest of their lives as reformed criminals, giving lectures on Hope like those autre foi convicts! 

Let us spare time for Usain Bolt, who is a CLEAN SPORTSMAN, and has to fight off the challenge from the dopers! 

To make the field even, why not let the tainted sprinters to have their own events and not get undue VISIBILITY AND MILEAGE OUT OF THESE EVENTS! 

What struck me as a opening remark was I WON’T KEEP YOU LONG, which is what King Henry the Eighth is supposed to have told his six wives! 

The story has a certain perverse eagerness, on the part of the person who concocted the story, based on the historical fact that Henry VIII had had six queen consorts most of whom had been executed by Henry! Tharoor merely repeated, what was originally said by , the then Prime Minister TONY BLAIR, to an European delegation.  Events couldn’t have unfolded as per that smart one-liner, as the reason for Henry VIII disposing of the Queens on one ground or the other was that, he believed that they were incapable of producing a male heir to the throne.  As such, it must have happened after each had brought forth a female child or had gone childless for a while. So such a PREPONDERENT STATEMENT WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE AT THE OUTSET OF EACH ENGAGEMENT! It appears to me as a smart concoction post facto! 

It leads us to the next fact whether any of the six queens did finally produce a male heir and if so did Henry stop his UXORICIDE? Jane Seymour did gift a male child, who eventually sat as the Defender of Faith, at a tender age of ten and died six years after his ascension! The next was the daughter of his first wife, Catherine of Aragon. She also did not serve long and Elizabeth I, ascended the throne and she became the Defender of the Faith for a full four and a half decades, before James came and legitimised the work of Wycliffe through the KING JAMES VERSION, of the Protestant Bible. 

So history is not a mere narration of events, it is a subtle interpretation of the events seen through the mental filters of any  mind conditioned in a way either voluntarily through an ideology or events. 

So when Tony Blair said that Henry told all his wives that he WOULDN’T KEEP THEM LONG, it was an expression of a newly converted Catholic, to further blacken the image of Henry the Eighth, as a demonstration of his adherence to his Catholic belief! 

One of the ideas found acceptable by Absalom, when he usurped rather attempted to usurp the throne from his father David, was that he prove to the people with him,  that he was irreconcilably alienated from his father David, was to indulge in sex with David, his father’s,  concubines, PUBLICLY!  Absalom did it publicly and proved to his followers that he cannot reconcile with his father, ever! Likewise, Tony Blair had to be judgementally insensitive to the man on whose edifice he had built his career and his being!

When Henry asked the Church of Rome for the dissolution of his marriage with Catherine of Aragon, there was his contemporary, Charles the Fifth, who was the Holy Roman Emperor, who secured the Pope’s temporal interests. And this Charles V, was a nephew of Catherine of Aragon. So the Pope had to make a choice, and circumstances made him to go with the immediate geographical power which was of more immediate importance to the Pope, then.

The interesting part is that the Kingship of England, which is legitimised by the Protestant Church of England , had to suffer the barb of Tony Blair, who because of his catholic leanings, was not willing to see the Liberty gained by the English people even though they were the benevolent byproducts of the evil deeds of Henry VIII! 

When Tharoor repeated the quote, it must have gratified many Papists, as Henry’s role has been truly SEMINAL in the Reformatory process (called schism by the Catholic Church) of the Church if England! 

Why not we look at the Pope not having granted the dissolution of the marriage between Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon as another political compulsion (as Charles V was keen on keeping his aunt as the Queen consort of England)?  We desire no such thought as that part of the history would have no great appeal, as there was no departure from normal human affiliations, whereas Henry’s deeds of executing 3 Catherines and two Annes stand in the way of his rehabilitation, for having secured the Liberty of the Church if England! (Btw Jane Seymour died soon after she delivered the baby boy, who became Edward VI) . 


But Tharoor’s opening sentence itself was accusative of the moral grounds on which Doctrine of Lapse was invented by the Imperial Governors General, to sustain their hold on Indian revenues! 

Hallowing the Profane! 

Some of the Christian sects and some Preachers cannot handle with equanimity of mind any of the passages or episodes which border on the concupiscent! 

One of those sects are the Pentecostals and one of the sermons I heard was about Abigail, the wife of Nabal and after becoming or making herself a widow, becomes King David’s wife! The Pastor went on to become the global head of the organisation . In the seventies when still a boy and bound by parental control over which church I attended, I was left with o prion but to attend the long-winded service on Sundays which were led by the whim of the Pastor than by any palpable Spirit!

One of the sermons I still remember was the one relating to ABIGAIL! His sermon summarised is: Abigail was the Holy Spirit who led David from committing the evil act of having to kill Nabal. As God had planned to destroy Nabal for his wickedness and prevented David from tainting his own hands with the blood of Nabal! 

I just couldn’t handle that metaphor of Abigail being the image of The Holy Ghost! One has to read I Samuel ch. 25 verse 26:

26 Now therefore, my lord, as the Lord liveth, and as thy soul liveth, seeing the Lord hath withholden thee from coming to shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thine own hand, now let thine enemies, and they that seek evil to my lord, be as Nabal.

This is what Abigail says to David before the ” death” of Nabal! To my mind it seems like a commitment made by Abigail to finish off Nabal, her husband, whom she mentions as ‘ son of Belial! in an earlier verse. 

Abigail, saddles her ass and meets David that night and Samuel had died just before this episode, paving a way for David to be upto his ways!  The passage says that she met David that night without informing Nabal, but there is nothing to show that she told Nabal the next day that she had gone and met David in the dark, to boot, at David’s place! 

Nabal is PETRIFIED , I am sure Abigail couldn’t have behaved as per the Pauline command: be in subjection to YOUR OWN husband! When she had the temerity to bad mouth Nabal to David the previous night, instead of being apologetic and appease the ‘ self declared master from Saul, the King’ , Abigail’s words smack of a quiescent willingness more than that shown by Bathsheba , while Uriah was busy defending the territories of Israel! 

Seems more like what David lost through Michal, had to be compensated from the wealth of Nabal! Remember, Bathsheba’s story happens much later. Abigail happens to be David’s second wife, but for all practical purposes, the first who stayed with him throughout, unlike the petulant Michal, who in Dryden’s terms was 


and was married off to Phlatiel, by Saul to spite David and was recovered much later during Ishbosheth’s reign! Much water would have flowed under the ridge, oops! bridge! 

Now to make ABIGAIL a metaphor for the Holy Ghost is HALLOWING THE PROFANE! 

Why some Pentecostal characters couldn’t accept the sexual element in the Bible and accept it as a reality of life, is  flummoxing (coinage intended).

The can’t accept that SONGS OF SOLOMON,  was plain romantic poetry at the time it was written ! 

They further hold a very self elevating belief that those who lead a celibate life and are dedicated to Hod’s work would be kept in a higher rank of a place called Zion, whereas those who are ‘ tainted’ with women would be in New Jerusalem !

Why this HALLOWING the PROFANE? That is also a part of life and existence, if you don’t want it go after those things you want! Why Hallow things which are Profane and ascribe mystical meanings to it? 

Many would have read the following passage from the New Testament:  Matthew chapter 17:

20 And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say unto this mountain, Remove from here to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

21But this kind goes not out but by prayer and fasting.

The above passage was when the disciples could not drive away the evil spirit from the boy, and Jesus stepped in and cured the boy. Thereafter Jesus’ disciples ask him WHY THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO DO WHAT JESUS SUCCEEDED IN DOING? 

The Godhood of Jesus is revealed in this passage, not because he succeeded where his disciples failed, but because Jesus says in unequivocal terms that it is the successful efforts of PRAYER &FASTING, which enables a human to perform such miracles. Secondly, Jesus doesn’t find fault with the father of the boy or worse still, even with the boy, but STATES THE INADEQUACIES IF HIS OWN DISCIPLES. 

Cut back and let us see some passages of Paul in I Corinthians chapter 11 verse 30 says thus:

For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep. 

James says this at Chapter 4:3:

Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.

The first is a passage by the self declared Apostle and the latter passage is by probably the earthly sibling of Jesus, if not the one who was one of the Boanerges. 

In any case, both the pillars one of the Jerusalem and the other of the Gentiles points fingers at others instead of looking into themselves and spread fear, guilt and a sense of inadequacy in OTHERS. These “apostles” we’re constantly excavating reasons for either the sicknesses or the non-receipt of the things sought through prayers by the lay men! 

THAT WAS THE DIFFERENCE. In their eagerness in building the Church, they couldn’t continue the path of self purification through prayers and fasting! 

If anyone is eager to believe that Christianity is being used to purvey guilt and portray the laymen as inadequate only in the recent centuries, then they are terribly wrong. The process started immediately after Jesus’ death and resurrection! 

Christ did not make the other man’s faults or INADEQUACIES as his reasons for non curing. No doubt He was/is God, but He recommended His disciples to look into themselves and not to find Pretexts. 

That is/was and would be Christianity and not as what the disciples wrote with a misplaced fervour to build a Church! 

God save us from false preachers of Christianity. 

Tag Cloud


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 93 other followers