IN RESPONSE TO JUTHIKA SARKAR'S OPPOSITION TO THE INTENT OF MY POST WHICH RAN THUS : 'A MONK WILL LOSE THE SPIRITUAL FIRE IF HE UNDULY ASSOCIATES EVEN WITH WOMEN DEVOTEES FOR A SIZEABLE PERIOD OF TIME'

Juthika Sarkar : ইস্টপ্রানা ভক্তের আবার জাত কি!

মীরাবাঈ ত নারী ছিলেন! তাহলে?
ঠিক মেনে নেওয়া গেলনা !

Sugata Bose : You need not accept Sri Ramakrishna's words for your wisdom dictates otherwise. Although these words are mine but the thought is of Ramakrishna's. Meera Bai was no ordinary devotee but was the bestower of spiritual wisdom herself. Hence, your opposition to the intent of my post seems to be extraneous. Despite your very obvious reference to an oft-quoted episode in Meera Bai's life, she sure was a woman and none will doubt it from the biological perspective, although, I can anticipate your quick opposition to this assertion of mine on the principled basis of the gender-neutrality of the Atman. So far as the spiritual sense is concerned, I have already pointed out how your objection is flawed and, hence, extraneous. Also, this sort of fractured apprehension of the intent of a writer's post is typical of the social media where people posit views as and how they feel like without any reference to the context or the substance thereof. It seems a superficial understanding is the call of the hour and is the dominant trend these days where people are more intent on making themselves heard rather than bring sanity to a discussion on the basis of rational propositions or opposition. Anyhow, be that as it may, it will be deemed a deal better by this writer if readers read well, then cogitate before hazarding opinions on a post little understood by them. Before I end this note, let me once more aver that all that I have said is in fullest corroboration of what Sri Ramakrishna has throughout maintained in his dialogues in 'The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna' which wholly agrees with my realisation on the matter as well. I am not using Ramakrishna here to bolster my defence against your supposed opposition but am doing so only to point out that even the great Master was of a similar opinion which I have, perhaps, inadvertently echoed. Positional differences apart, I hope monks will be well advised to follow the content of my post in principle and in practice, for in doing so they will rightly fulfil the obligations of the difficult vocation they have chosen as their earthly career.

So far as the fundamental feature of the post is concerned, let me aver that Sri Ramakrishna was of the view that association with women devotees, even if they were supposedly of an apparently exalted status, is extremely harmful for monks and male devotees and portentous of possible downfall. He, therefore, advised, nay, warned his male devotees not to associate even with women of high spiritual inclination and having the 'vatsalya' (affectionate) mood of a mother towards her child, for the Master said that women steal a male devotee's spiritual identity. A cursory glance 'The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna' will prove my point and it is requested that those who have a differing view to mine in relation to this post may go through this epic work of 'M' before hazarding contrary comments further, although, democratically speaking, they are welcome to their contrarian stance by all means. The subject under discussion being of great moment to a monk's life, it is hoped that lay devotees who are self-deluded and deluded by the myriad mischief of Maya will, henceforth, practise greater restraint in committing themselves to such verbal indiscretions to retain sanity of thought and to help maintain social propriety as well as intellectual and spiritual rigour in precept and practice.

Juthika Sarkar : বুঝলাম. আবার এও বলি-
সুভাষচন্দ্র বোস মানুষটি ত কম কিছু সন্ন্যাসী ছিলেন না!!!
তিনি ত'আস্ত একটা নারীবাহিনী করে গিয়েছেন!

Sugata Bose : Juthika Sarkar, I must say that you are quite fanciful in your intellectual deliberations and somewhat wild in your assertions at that, for from nowhere you bring in Meera Bai, then Subhas Chandra as a supposed monk with a women's regiment to give stupendous substance to your fallacious arguments. I find it difficult to address such superb irrelevance by way of stated counter-comment for I believe that taxing my faculties to cope with such pronounced irrationality is an exercise in futility. Hence, I desist from further deliberations.