jabdakhata

Girish Ghosh was a Bohemian, in every sense. In his young days he destroyed a Durga idol that was mischievously put in his house by some people to embarrass the family. He chased an astrologer and a pretentious sannyasin away when he discovered their falsehoods. He flaunted his atheism to anybody and everybody. Nobody could argue with him as they were sure to get defeated by his tremendous intellectual acumen. But Girish also had a large heart. He collected a group of young boys and helped anybody who was in need - like takings the unwanted corpse for cremation, providing health care to the sick, providing financial help to the poor and needy and many such selfless activities. He first set up his theater, the National Theater, as an amateur actor and  produced Sadhabar Ekadashi, a satire written by Michael Madhusudan Datta, the famous poet, and Neeldarpan, based on the novel of the same name written by Dinabandhu Mitra against the brutal tyranny and oppression of the indigo planters

An article appeared in Times of India by a certain Mr. Verma on the distinction between Nationalism and Patriotism. Thankfully, unlike other "liberals", the author has not used the term jingoism to denote the Nationalistic fervours. One of course cannot accuse ToI to be either a Nationalistic or a Patriotic Newspaper. It just wants to position itself as a "secular", "liberal" paper and therefore happy to give opportunity to like minded secular and liberals to express their view points, however fallacious they may be. First, on the point of Nationalism. There is a misguided perception prevalent that supporting the country's rights to defend itself from the inimical interests and protecting its interests by raising a pitch against the arch enemies is "Nationalism". Earlier they used to call it jingoism, now mercifully they have toned down the rhetoric as it finds no takers. The author carefully pins the blame on the present Government to

From 1880 onward Girish was a sensation on the stage. Yet his life was empty. His personal tragedies clouded his judgement and he became a rebel in the truest sense. He was always a rebel. Now he worked against all social conventions and norms. He was addicted to drinking. It is not evident if he had sinned as he always claimed to have done. He had a propensity of overstating his sinners, by comparing himself to Jagai Madhai, the two ruffians who were converted by Sri Chaitanya. However Girish received the grace soon. In 1879 he had met Ramakrishna in a devotee's house, but he thought that Ramakrishna was full of pretension. He was not impressed. He had seen too much of hypocrisy in the name of religion to be confounded by it. He had some spiritual experiences but nevertheless he continued with his exploits on the stage. 1884 was a phenomenal year. In this year he composed his masterpiece that drew him closer to his guru - Chaitanya Leela - after the great saint Sri Chaitanya Mah

Naval Revolt was one of the greatest revolts in Indian history, inspired directly by the INA saga. Our history books are silent about the great sacrifices borne by the revolutionaries and the price that they had to pay. The books are also silent about another fact - the great betrayal of the politicians, esp. of Indian National Congress leaders which included Gandhi, Nehru and Patel. Jinnah's communal betrayal is anyway legendary but of Gandhi, Nehru? Of Sardar Patel - the iron man who has now the tallest statue? Well, history was written by favour seekers, not by truth seekers. That is the reason why naval revolt has been relegated to the darkest corner and we do not even remember one of the greatest events of our nation. Does Indian Navy celebrate it? Don't think so - to Navy the mutineers are traitors, just as for a long time INA was just an army of traitors to the Indian Army leadership who had to seek favour from their own political bosses. Let us now recollect what

Very few people in India outside Bengal know of Girish Chandra Ghosh, the prolific play writer, the father of theatre in Bengal and in India who was once widely regarded as Shakespeare of Bengal and Garrick of Bengali stage. Girish Ghosh was a playwright, a director, an actor, a poet, all moulded into one. He was a versatile genius. He was a lion among men and like a lion he dominated everything that he did. He never cared for conventions. He did not tolerate hypocrisy. He ensured decent living for many women who were otherwise considered "fallen" by the society. He led an intemperate life in a rebellious spirit for sometime, till he met the ultimate man whom he was searching for throughout his life. Girish was appreciated by many eminent personalities, actor and intellectual Utpal Datta being one one of them. In his book Girish Mahima (Greatness of Girish), Utpal Datta was full of praise for him. Recently veteran actor Soumitra Chatterjee enacted as a solo actor in one of

Is calling for war justified? In the past few weeks the events that unfolded almost resulted in a skirmish between the two bitter enemies. There have been a lot of fights over it in the social media, and in political circles. The peaceniks had started a hashtag #saynotowar. Now is that a good or a bad move? What does dharma say? Of course waging war is abominable. Any person in his or her same mind would be averse to war. However does that apply to the right to defend oneself? One's own territory? When dharma is being brutalized everyday, when one's people are killed everyday by a devious, cunning and ruthless enemy who has anyway waged a third grade proxy war for decades now? What about fights with the evil forces who kills, tortures, and subjugates, spread lies and hatred? Is war an option or should we still aim for peace? Mahabharata is clear, peace is preferable over war only when we are able to achieve a solution to our problem, i.e when we are able to turn the tides

If we carefully study the history of India in the last millennium, we shall see that its a continuous history of backbiting, treachery and undoing of good work through personal hatred, animosity, jealousy and extreme selfishness that would often overshadow national and community interests. Every stroke of misfortune that India suffered had been on account of one of these reasons. Great men rose into prominence, great, self sacrificing men who were ready to do everything possible to resist evils in the form of conquests, but petty, mean, selfish men became their thorns, did everything to put a stop to their efforts and in the process helped India sink deeper and deeper into darkness. Blind hatred caused many problems - it invited enemies to attack the country, opened up great possibilities for its conquests and plunder and helped hatred mongers to come on a common platform to deliver a crushing blow to the object of the hate. In many cases such hatred was driven by communal passion, i