IN DEFENCE OF THE RAMAKRISHNA MISSION ... 9
Now let us make an analysis of Sri Rantidev Sengupta's original post, dated 12 September, 2018, which has created such a furore on facebook and other social media.
TEXT OF ORIGINAL POST (FIRST PERSON BENGALI) OF RANTIDEV SENGUPTA RENDERED INTO ENGLISH IN THE FIRST PERSON BY SUGATA BOSE (Sugata Bose). THE FOURTH INSTALMENT FOLLOWS :
The Suviranandas will not be able to say so because it is they who have issued the permit to the ruling party to use the Ramakrishna Mission for their political ends. It is with a tinge of sadness that I have noticed that over the past few years the senior monks of the Mission have busied themselves in pleasing the ruling party. The ruling party as well has been continually making political comments while keeping the monks of the Order seated beside them. While unveiling the memorial plaque of Sister Nivedita at Wimbledon last year, Swami Suhitananda had said there that it was a recognition accorded to Mamata Banerjee. And yet, he very well aware that neither the Ramakrishna Mission nor Mamata Banerjee had anything to do by way of contributing to the setting up of the memorial blue plaque. It was the sole endeavour of Bengalis based in London that was instrumental in the setting up of the memorial plaque. I am even aware of the fact that a biographer of Nivedita was excluded from the list of speakers for a programme conducted by the Mission, a list in which he was originally there, just because he was not in the good books of the ruling party.
ANALYSIS :
Sri Rantidev Sengupta's upbraiding of the Ramakrishna Mission's monks in executive positions of prominence now becomes more open and direct. He straightaway points his accusing fingers at Swami Suvirananda, the General Secretary of the Order, and naturally so, since the Swami holds the top executive post in the Order and is ultimately responsible for all major executive decisions pertaining to the same. The accusation is quite serious and merits deep introspection on the part of all including the Mission authorities, for, after all, public perception matters as it pertains to the goodwill of the Ramakrishna Mission. This goodwill has been hard earned for over a century and may not be allowed to undergo erosion quite so easily.
The charge levelled by Sengupta against the senior monks of the Order busying themselves to please the ruling party, a trend which has disturbed him over the past few years needs substantiation or else it would be deemed a subjective feeling of the gentleman based on his personal perceptions which are largely subjective and liable to error. After all, gratitude, civility and cordiality shown by the Mission monks to the Chief Minister for help rendered them by her to execute their major programmes need not be construed as sycophancy. A monk has nothing to give to his benefactor by way of material item and, therefore, it is most meet if he showers his blessings and good wishes copiously on her for the assistance rendered by her. Viewing this gesture of goodwill and kindness need not be interpreted as servility of the monk to the Chief Minister and her party. It is too far-fetched an idea and the accusation too wild.
In a democratic state it is a frequent custom to invite dignitaries and esteemed individuals from all walks of life to adorn the stage for important programmes in any discipline of human endeavour. As such, it may be a frequent occurrence for senior monks of the Order of executive rank to be present in programmes conducted by the State Government, especially, when such a programme pertains to a social cause. If in the presence of a monk of the Order, the ruling party, as alleged, delivers political statements from the podium, is the monk to be blamed for it or is it therefore party to such political delivery? Ought the Mission then to eschew all connections with such programmes? This is a moot point for debate.
Swami Suhitananda's alleged statement at Wimbledon that the setting up of the blue plaque in memory of Nivedita was in effect a recognition of Mamata Banerjee's labour of love for the entire project may have been ill-timed and ha drawn the ire of Sri Sengupta. But the revered monk may merely have made this remark by way of expressing his gratitude for the not too inconsiderable help the Mission had received from the Chief Minister for the entire sesquicentennial celebrations of the Sister which involved the clearing and execution of many projects in her name. That it is being singled out by Sengupta thus to paint Swami Suhitananda in a poor light is not only uncalled for but positively unfortunate. Surely, the sincere good wishes the monk must have felt it his duty to express to the Chief Minister for all the help she had rendered to the Mission in loving memory of the Sister must have prompted him thus to make his statement and nothing more need be read into it.
The last charge levelled by Sengupta is that of a biographer of Nivedita being disinvited from speaking at a programme of the Ramakrishna Mission owing to his being not quite in the good books of the ruling party needs factual verification for the motive attached. If indeed he was thus excluded, it would paint the Mission in a rather poor light but then there could have been umpteen reasons other than the one cited by Sengupta for such a withdrawal of the gentleman's name from the original list of speakers.
I have thus provided by way of defence of the Ramakrishna Mission and its senior monks plausible alternative perspectives to the different allegations levelled by Sri Rantidev Sengupta against them. It is for the reader to peruse through this labour of love and arrive at his inferential understanding of things. May the air rendered murky by these allegations thus clear for all of us to breathe freely!
End of Part 9
To be serialised...
Written by Sugata Bose
Now let us make an analysis of Sri Rantidev Sengupta's original post, dated 12 September, 2018, which has created such a furore on facebook and other social media.
TEXT OF ORIGINAL POST (FIRST PERSON BENGALI) OF RANTIDEV SENGUPTA RENDERED INTO ENGLISH IN THE FIRST PERSON BY SUGATA BOSE (Sugata Bose). THE FOURTH INSTALMENT FOLLOWS :
The Suviranandas will not be able to say so because it is they who have issued the permit to the ruling party to use the Ramakrishna Mission for their political ends. It is with a tinge of sadness that I have noticed that over the past few years the senior monks of the Mission have busied themselves in pleasing the ruling party. The ruling party as well has been continually making political comments while keeping the monks of the Order seated beside them. While unveiling the memorial plaque of Sister Nivedita at Wimbledon last year, Swami Suhitananda had said there that it was a recognition accorded to Mamata Banerjee. And yet, he very well aware that neither the Ramakrishna Mission nor Mamata Banerjee had anything to do by way of contributing to the setting up of the memorial blue plaque. It was the sole endeavour of Bengalis based in London that was instrumental in the setting up of the memorial plaque. I am even aware of the fact that a biographer of Nivedita was excluded from the list of speakers for a programme conducted by the Mission, a list in which he was originally there, just because he was not in the good books of the ruling party.
ANALYSIS :
Sri Rantidev Sengupta's upbraiding of the Ramakrishna Mission's monks in executive positions of prominence now becomes more open and direct. He straightaway points his accusing fingers at Swami Suvirananda, the General Secretary of the Order, and naturally so, since the Swami holds the top executive post in the Order and is ultimately responsible for all major executive decisions pertaining to the same. The accusation is quite serious and merits deep introspection on the part of all including the Mission authorities, for, after all, public perception matters as it pertains to the goodwill of the Ramakrishna Mission. This goodwill has been hard earned for over a century and may not be allowed to undergo erosion quite so easily.
The charge levelled by Sengupta against the senior monks of the Order busying themselves to please the ruling party, a trend which has disturbed him over the past few years needs substantiation or else it would be deemed a subjective feeling of the gentleman based on his personal perceptions which are largely subjective and liable to error. After all, gratitude, civility and cordiality shown by the Mission monks to the Chief Minister for help rendered them by her to execute their major programmes need not be construed as sycophancy. A monk has nothing to give to his benefactor by way of material item and, therefore, it is most meet if he showers his blessings and good wishes copiously on her for the assistance rendered by her. Viewing this gesture of goodwill and kindness need not be interpreted as servility of the monk to the Chief Minister and her party. It is too far-fetched an idea and the accusation too wild.
In a democratic state it is a frequent custom to invite dignitaries and esteemed individuals from all walks of life to adorn the stage for important programmes in any discipline of human endeavour. As such, it may be a frequent occurrence for senior monks of the Order of executive rank to be present in programmes conducted by the State Government, especially, when such a programme pertains to a social cause. If in the presence of a monk of the Order, the ruling party, as alleged, delivers political statements from the podium, is the monk to be blamed for it or is it therefore party to such political delivery? Ought the Mission then to eschew all connections with such programmes? This is a moot point for debate.
Swami Suhitananda's alleged statement at Wimbledon that the setting up of the blue plaque in memory of Nivedita was in effect a recognition of Mamata Banerjee's labour of love for the entire project may have been ill-timed and ha drawn the ire of Sri Sengupta. But the revered monk may merely have made this remark by way of expressing his gratitude for the not too inconsiderable help the Mission had received from the Chief Minister for the entire sesquicentennial celebrations of the Sister which involved the clearing and execution of many projects in her name. That it is being singled out by Sengupta thus to paint Swami Suhitananda in a poor light is not only uncalled for but positively unfortunate. Surely, the sincere good wishes the monk must have felt it his duty to express to the Chief Minister for all the help she had rendered to the Mission in loving memory of the Sister must have prompted him thus to make his statement and nothing more need be read into it.
The last charge levelled by Sengupta is that of a biographer of Nivedita being disinvited from speaking at a programme of the Ramakrishna Mission owing to his being not quite in the good books of the ruling party needs factual verification for the motive attached. If indeed he was thus excluded, it would paint the Mission in a rather poor light but then there could have been umpteen reasons other than the one cited by Sengupta for such a withdrawal of the gentleman's name from the original list of speakers.
I have thus provided by way of defence of the Ramakrishna Mission and its senior monks plausible alternative perspectives to the different allegations levelled by Sri Rantidev Sengupta against them. It is for the reader to peruse through this labour of love and arrive at his inferential understanding of things. May the air rendered murky by these allegations thus clear for all of us to breathe freely!
End of Part 9
To be serialised...
Written by Sugata Bose
No comments:
Post a Comment