Here Charitable Individualism is the key!… nothing less.

I would not have brought in a comparison between Rajneesh @Osho  and Asaram Bapu had TIMES OF INDIA not carried an article defending Asaram Bapu on the grounds that Asaram was a married man and had never ever recommended sexual abstention or celibacy; that the sense of guilt was propounded by the Christian theologians; that Asaram is merely alleged by a girl to have been molested sexually and  that if at all what Asaram is alleged to have committed was an offence, it would be for the courts of law to determine and that there was no MORAL ISSUE involved in the allegations against him!

I have never found such a fallacious argument ever advanced in support of any Godman.

Let us first be frank to admit that he was in peddling his branch of SPIRITUALITY. Do we have any Godman in this country who has propagated SPIRITUALITY through sex? Yes, the shining example was RAJNEESH @ Osho. His method was, as i understood him, that one cannot reach the ultimate by having unresolved issues merely based on feelings of GUILT. One has to overcome, rather go beyond Guilt and if sexuality stood in the way, one ought to take a deep dive into what one fears as inducing GUILT and overcome through SURFEIT of the same! But sex was never prescribed by him as a remedy. He wanted to show that sex was beautiful, let human beings not make it ugly through GUILT.

If not for anything else, Osho was not a hypocrite, he might have been fundamentally wrong, but in no case did he practice something which he did not preach. To put in simple terms he was HONEST with himself.

I would consider it an insult to compare an honest man with a hypocrite- especially when he assumes a garb of spirituality and pontificates on spiritualism, whereas he does not have the minimum moral standard to have the parents of the female child around when he administered whatever he wanted to administer. It is the law of the land prescribed to police officers that NO WOMAN SHALL BE FRISKED OR PERSONALLY SEARCHED BY ANYONE EXCEPT ANOTHER FEMALE. Further, it is an acknowledged rule that most of the male doctors while examining a female patient always have another female nurse around so that he does not become a victim of any allegations raised by the female patient later.

When such is the practice, should it not have been that Asaram Bapu should have had another female or male relative of the girl around when he was launching on his spiritual “cornucopia”?

To defend a Godman who is accused of molesting a young girl on inane grounds of GUILTLESS HINDUISM is perverting the very basis of Hinduism. Even the HINDU MARRIAGE laws do not permit bigamy (at least after 1955) except for people who can show that it is their religious practice to marry more than one. When such is the case defending a so called spiritual guru, who is alleged to have exploited the innocence of a teenaged girl, is not only premature but untenable to any civilized society!


Comments on: "Rajneesh Vs. Asaram Bapu!" (3)

  1. Sampada said:

    All that you have written above….which gives an impression of a well thought, logically written blog…. is based on an assumption that the allegation is truth!!!! For your information…It has not been proved. its only wise, not to make judgements unless you know the truth and well word TRUTH these days is a rare entity as it is very common and easy for our highly ‘IR’responsible media and great Indian corrupted system to misreport things, manipulate statements, create proofs to create and defend any story they want to. You also, along with crores of Indians are a victim of believing what you are shown as truth…. You along with crores of Indians who think they are so called educated and intellectuals can think and see only what some media houses and ‘news DEALERS’ there in, want you to think! You and crores of others including your press and media…. are highly inadequate to comment or criticize or analyze, leave alone understanding…. People like Osho, Asaram Bapu,…and many others…. Please donot like other crores … display your lack of wisdom!


    • Dear Sampada, the only wise one!
      Thanks for your comment and your assessment that this blog “is based on an assumption that the allegation is truth!!!!”
      Dear Sampada , the only wise one, TRUTH relating to the allegations leveled are made up of “facts” which have so far been made available to the public. I was not talking of “spiritual Truths”, I was merely talking of a public person who has been accused of “misbehavior of a sexual kind with a girl” and his response of shying away from investigations, when called upon to answer the FACTS as disclosed in the FIR.
      Asaram Bapu is entitled to “presumption of innocence” to most of the criminal charges, until proven guilty, like any other Indian. But, the same “presumption of innocence” should not be discriminatory ! If a private person (by this I mean a non-public figure) has to present himself before the authorities when such allegations are brought, a public figure SHOULD ALSO present himself before the authorities and SUBMIT himself to the investigations! One cannot choose PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE and run away from the NON-DISCRIMINATORY treatment.
      But, Alas! Asaram Bapu has tried every trick in the book to avoid and/or delay the consequential proceedings, which are to follow as per law.
      To defend Asaram Bapu, merely on the grounds that the newspaper had defended, was facetious – that was my point.
      I still believe that a public figure commanding MORAL AUTHORITY over millions should also bow to the MORAL PARADIGM, which has fundamentally created the trust in him. Merely to hide under the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE clause would not behove a public figure whose very moral authority is subliminally built on his RECTITUDE.
      By the way, if I have “displayed any lack of wisdom”, i am proud to say that my Constitution gives me a fundamental right not only to be unwise but even to display “lack of wisdom” and that right shall never, ever be bartered away to obtain the applause of novices who preach, without giving reasons as to why I am “unwise”- as you put it!
      Thanks, but.


  2. As Shakespeare puts it through the mouth of Ophelia in HAMLET
    But, good my brother,
    Do not, as some ungracious pastors do,
    Show me the steep and thorny way to heaven,
    Whiles, like a puff’ d and reckless libertine,
    Himself the primrose path of dalliance treads,
    And reaks not his own rede.

    (the last line means ‘and not follow his own advice”)

    How well the line fits the hypocrites who in the name of spirituality do deeds which are inconsistent with what they preach!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: