Thank you for your charming little letter of 7th September.
Certainly, I am conscious of what you had written me earlier. However, a reply to you, though in the works, was certainly not a priority for me. That remains so even today. I have better people and more productive things to do, rather than arm-wrestle with you, "charming" enough as that may be.
It is you who wrote to me first, making an unprovoked attack on my beliefs. And in your letters after letters, you have hurled insults after insults at me.
From beginning to end, your letters were part of an orchestrated, systematic attempt to browbeat me, overawe and intimidate me, as part of your "Gandhian" effort to get me to withdraw my denunciation of your demon-god, Gandhi.
And these attempts have been truly Gandhian. After all, did not Gandhi blackmail the Dalit leader, Ambedkar, so that he surrendered a benefit that would have liberated once and forever, the Dalits from the slavery of Hinduism? Did not Gandhi blackmail his opponents to force out the democratically elected President of the Indian National Congress, Subhashchandra Basu? Did not Gandhi blackmail Nehru and Patel to hand over to Pakistan a share of British India funds, even though they had invaded Jammu & Kashmir and had perpetrated frightful atrocities on Hindus and Christians? And so on and so on.
You call me a hypocrite because I expose the hypocrisy of Gandhi in his subversion of the Gospel of Christ.
You call me a hypocrite for exposing the hypocrisy of Gandhi who built his value-system upon his deliberate misrepresentation of Christ Jesus.
I have stood patiently, taking all these insults, for the sake of Christ. However, you talk nonsense when you claim that I need your permission to put up the exchange which you initiated by your insulting letters, and to which I have replied in defense.
I have not breached your privacy in any manner. I have no information who you are, and do not care to seek that out. The only thing that could identify you was your email identity, which I had suppressed to safeguard your personal privacy. I no longer believe that I owe you that courtesy, not after you have finally exposed your true colors in your email of 7th September.
I have not agreed with you at commencement, that I will keep our exchange, which you initiated, private and confidential. You had not specified that your letters were confidential or private, and now is not the time to do so.
When a man walks into a stranger's house and berates him and insults him and threatens him, he does not have the right to insist that his victim not report, in detail or in precis, their exchange. This much should be obvious.
Therefore, your demand is declined.
I have been wondering why you are so hysteric, so frantically obsessed with your effort to censor these pages, to obscure them from the public eye, to terrorize, intimidate and ridicule me into taking them down. The more desperate you get, the more you put yourself under question, and draw attention to yourself.
But, I believe that I have the answer: Your fear that you have exposed yourself as another hypocrite to your acquaintances: "Like Guru, like Chela". Tough luck. It is your funeral, not mine. It is not my business to protect your fat posterior; you ought to cultivate that art yourself, instead of running around in circles, insulting people and making outlandish claims and posturings, then begging, threatening, ridiculing and grovelling before them so that they do not expose your threats and fantastic posturings to the general public.
[I will withdraw the pages incorporating the letters from you, if I get a sincere apology: first to Christ Jesus, and second to me. The pages exposing Gandhi's hypocrisy will remain. ]
You make a bald assertion that I am illogical, that my response is purely out of the need to argue. Rejected.
You make a bald assertion that I have written as per my whim, and other drivel about my vocabulary. Rejected.
You allege that I have questioned your upbringing. Not aware of what you are talking about. Allegation denied.
You say that you have not criticised Christ. A lie. Gandhi, your teacher, deliberately misrepresents Christ, which misrepresentations are a central part of Gandhianism, and you, who is, by your own claim, a disciple of Gandhi, you are a party to, and a re-iterator of, these lies.
You say: "I am not questioning your religious authority, you please don't question mine!" You lie. You started this exchange by questioning my authority to take Gandhi to task for perverting deliberately the Message of Christ. Thereby, you very incontrovertibly questioned both Christ and me. Me, because I refuse to countenance any attempt to corrupt Christ's message.
You wrote: "Let me assure you there is no man eater in the forest." Are you trying to say that there are no man-eaters in the forest, or that there is no man-eater on the path you walk. How do you know that? Do you have divine fore-knowledge?
Most spiritual instructors agree that the spiritual journey is a uncertain one; that no one can know what lies beyond the corner. Yet you insist that there are no pitfalls ahead on your path, a knowledge which, if true, demonstrates that you are evidently omniscient.
Jesus Christ insistently taught that he is the only way to heaven, that all others who claim to be saviours and mediators are robbers and murderers of souls - man-eaters. You insist that they are not. Therefore, by your doctrine, either Jesus lies or he is a fool. Yet you say that he is a "good man." Good man, yes, by your doctrine, but not what he insistently claimed to be, the one and only begotten Son of God made incarnate to save mankind.
You wrote: "If Mahatma disagreed with the Christian writings, what gives you the moral authority to use derogative, even if a handful, words against him?"
I have not used derogative words: I have used precise words. To call a spade a spade and a hypocrite a hypocrite is not to badword, but to state the bald facts and nothing more.
But let me ask you: What gives Gandhi or you or anyone else the right to deliberately and knowingly distort the message of Christ?
As for my right, I am Christ's disciple, therefore it is both my right and my duty to defend his Gospel from charlattans like Gandhi.
But what Gandhi did was much more than mere 'disagree'; he actively and deliberately misrepresented, misrepresents Christ and his message. That is the work of a liar and a hypocrite. And it is my moral duty to point out this truth - that Gandhi deliberately misrepresented Christ and therefore, by his actions, demonstrated that he was nothing more than a hypocrite, a perverter and a seducer of souls. You have no reasons at all to be hurt by this, most importantly because, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Christ, you ought not to countenance or seek to justify hypocrisy.
You wrote: "Would the Christ like your behaviour?" The answer is: Yes! I follow his commandment in defending the truth and in exposing lies. I fulfil my obligation to him by defending his message from those who would corrupt it and seduce souls from him, into the paths of damnation.
Protestants and all heretics and schismatics and apostates are not Christians.
So much for now. Now it is for you to cook up yet another "charming" letter to me. I am looking forward to it.
This is just a follow-up message to my previous one. I requested you to delete my emails, which you published without my consent, from your microsite. How come you never replied to my email in which I told you to remove my email?
Now here you are, such a fallen, degraded thief, but you have the audacity to point your finger at the other person. You use words such as "dissembler" and "seducer" in honour of other men, but what are you? Dissembler you bloody well are, but seducer you cannot be, that requires a certain charm which thieves like you do not posses. I am calling you a thief since technically you are a thief. However, let me add for your satisfaction, your thievery doesn't amount to a sane thievery, so you can get away by suggesting you are insane, which I believe you are since you have your very own interpretation of the preaching of Christ, according to which, I guess, you believe it's your birth right to publish one's letters without even seeking permission.
Now, you think you have a conscience and you believe you are going to Heaven (if there is such a place) and anyone who doesn't agree with your most preposterous theory will go to Hell.
Please delete my email from your site, Mr. Ignorant Silly Stupid Gunga Din, and I shall appreciate your gesture. And if you do not do so, I shall be relieved of all doubts: My belief that you are not just an ignoramus man but a persistent falsifier of truth and a thief will be vindicated.
Look inside yourself before pointing fingers at others and accusing them of not following your Gospels. You are too imperfect to tell others about perfection. You are standing up for ideals you are can't live up to.
Kapil
In a message dated 30/08/2003 14:53:30 GMT Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
I have just read your response to my email which you published on your site without my consent.
Your response is mostly illogical, resulting, I suppose, from your zealous nature to argue. You have wriiten as per you whims and fancies, using vocabulary to best suit your preposterous point of view. You even questioned my upbringing.
Like you are a believer of Christ, I am a believer of Mahatma. But I never criticised the Christ for anything. How could I? Tears popped out of my eyes when I saw his crucifixion images at the city's Catholic church. I have never criticised the Christ. In fact I have worshipped Christ. At the same time, however, I have worshipped the Mahatma also. The Mahatma to me is MY guru; he dragged me out of utter ignorance. To me Mahatma Ji is nothing less than God. I am not questioning your religious authority, you please don't question mine! I find satisfaction in my own scriptures; and let me assure you there is no "man eater in the forest."
If Mahatma disagreed with the Christian writings, what gives you the moral authority to use derogative, even if a handful, words against him? Would the Christ like your behaviour? The best way to deal with this would be to disagree with Gandhi Ji's views, in a dignified manner.
You call yourself a Christian in thought and action, how can you then publish my emails which I wrote to you, although in reference to an article published on your site, on a personal level? You don't have my permission to post my emails on your site; kindly remove them. I hope as a Christian, you would show some respect here.
You refuse to accept Protestants as Christians - the following point is a result of your remark: I hope this is my last email to you.
Kapil
In a message dated 30/08/2003 14:53:30 GMT Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:
