In my opinion, the author takes a very simplistic view of the current situation in India and seems to take the side of sensationalism rather than intellectual journalism. I do not keep myself reminded of the fact that India is being led by a Sikh Prime Minister and a Muslim President, rather I look at the worthiness of the individuals who occupy these pivotal positions.
Does the author have proof that the so called "holy man" is not guilty? The title of the Shankaracharya is what is sacred and revered. A person occupying this seat cannot misuse the powers vested in him. Similar to how being the Pope does not put him above the law. Misinterpreting this as the downfall of Hinduism and terming this an insult to the Hindus is equivalent to the anti social elements referred to in the Godhra incident inducing religion based riots and the British dividing India on the basis of religion.
Thankfully the spiritual leaders of Hinduism have other important things to do than heed to the author's advise to form a "Supreme Spiritual Conclave".India has always been secular and will remain so, overcoming such irrational and fanatic journalism from educated but narrow minded beings.
