IN RESPONSE TO A READER'S COMMENT WHO HAD, AS USUAL, MISREAD MY INTENT IN A POST ON NETAJI
Perhaps, you did not quite get the drift of the essay. There has nowhere been any mention that the narrative of Bhagavanji was a concoction. Rather the thrust has been to highlight how Bhagavanji's image has been attempted to be tarnished through the PTSD allegation and how Netaji has been calumnised by a concocted marriage tale.
Commercial considerations are being witnessed as paramount and ethical considerations of mimimal significance when one sees the blatant flouting of Bhagavanji's own assertions regarding Netaji's alleged marriage whose falsity he repudiated in no uncertain terms. And yet this group adheres to the proposition of Bhagavanji as Netaji in spiritual seclusion as gospel truth while disbelieving his own assertions about his life’s contour and character. Such convenience of acceptance and rejection of the venerable monk's statements as and when it suits them makes a mockery of their devotion either to him or to Netaji and makes it apparent that worldly considerations have come to pollute minds, perhaps originally devoted to the discovery of truth, although, even that seems today a dubious supposition.
To keep all parties happy and conduct commerce may suit the seekers of profit but not the seekers of truth. The inability to take a stand on the dubious claim of Netaji's marriage when there is not a shred of legally tenable evidence to support it, to accept the date of 16 September, 1985 as the date of Bhagavanji's death in an equal atmosphere of absence of evidence reeks of a complicity with commercial convenience and the desire to steer clear of litigation to which public denial of Netaji's alleged marriage and fathering of progeny could land them in. Such compromises made by men who claim themselves to be researchers show the entire community of researchers in a poor light.
But the worst offence is the allegation that Bhagavanji in all likelihood suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which so debilitated his nervous organisation that he resorted to fantastic tales that are simply impossible to achieve in this concrete world of ours. Instead of debunking altogether such claims and with it the proposition that Bhagavanji was Netaji in his post-disappearance phase, these compromised characters felt the necessity to accept Bhagavanji as Netaji while reserving for them the temerity to term him a PTSD patient suffering from fantastic delusions. Moreover, to allow such personal beliefs to percolate into the script of a film of mass currency has been an unpardonable act of not only indiscretion but apparently also of deliberate defaming of one of the greatest heroes of the nation for whatever considerations may have prompted them to have done so. Both Netaji and Bhagavanji stands maligned thus to the horror of venerable souls like Bijoy Nag, Drjayanta Choudhuri, Dr. Madhusudan Pal, Keshab Bhattacherjee and a host of others, besides countless affiliates who form the rank and file of the Grande Armee of Netaji.
All these issues were cited in the essay but it seems readers wish to read in a write-up what they wish to read in it and not what it truly contains. This is unfortunate but is the case, nonetheless. Hope to have conveyed myself clearly to your satisfaction and I thank you for having read the write-up, albeit in erroneous apprehension of it.
Written by Sugata Bose
Perhaps, you did not quite get the drift of the essay. There has nowhere been any mention that the narrative of Bhagavanji was a concoction. Rather the thrust has been to highlight how Bhagavanji's image has been attempted to be tarnished through the PTSD allegation and how Netaji has been calumnised by a concocted marriage tale.
Commercial considerations are being witnessed as paramount and ethical considerations of mimimal significance when one sees the blatant flouting of Bhagavanji's own assertions regarding Netaji's alleged marriage whose falsity he repudiated in no uncertain terms. And yet this group adheres to the proposition of Bhagavanji as Netaji in spiritual seclusion as gospel truth while disbelieving his own assertions about his life’s contour and character. Such convenience of acceptance and rejection of the venerable monk's statements as and when it suits them makes a mockery of their devotion either to him or to Netaji and makes it apparent that worldly considerations have come to pollute minds, perhaps originally devoted to the discovery of truth, although, even that seems today a dubious supposition.
To keep all parties happy and conduct commerce may suit the seekers of profit but not the seekers of truth. The inability to take a stand on the dubious claim of Netaji's marriage when there is not a shred of legally tenable evidence to support it, to accept the date of 16 September, 1985 as the date of Bhagavanji's death in an equal atmosphere of absence of evidence reeks of a complicity with commercial convenience and the desire to steer clear of litigation to which public denial of Netaji's alleged marriage and fathering of progeny could land them in. Such compromises made by men who claim themselves to be researchers show the entire community of researchers in a poor light.
But the worst offence is the allegation that Bhagavanji in all likelihood suffered from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which so debilitated his nervous organisation that he resorted to fantastic tales that are simply impossible to achieve in this concrete world of ours. Instead of debunking altogether such claims and with it the proposition that Bhagavanji was Netaji in his post-disappearance phase, these compromised characters felt the necessity to accept Bhagavanji as Netaji while reserving for them the temerity to term him a PTSD patient suffering from fantastic delusions. Moreover, to allow such personal beliefs to percolate into the script of a film of mass currency has been an unpardonable act of not only indiscretion but apparently also of deliberate defaming of one of the greatest heroes of the nation for whatever considerations may have prompted them to have done so. Both Netaji and Bhagavanji stands maligned thus to the horror of venerable souls like Bijoy Nag, Drjayanta Choudhuri, Dr. Madhusudan Pal, Keshab Bhattacherjee and a host of others, besides countless affiliates who form the rank and file of the Grande Armee of Netaji.
All these issues were cited in the essay but it seems readers wish to read in a write-up what they wish to read in it and not what it truly contains. This is unfortunate but is the case, nonetheless. Hope to have conveyed myself clearly to your satisfaction and I thank you for having read the write-up, albeit in erroneous apprehension of it.
Written by Sugata Bose
No comments:
Post a Comment