History Of Bengal

[Guest]

I HAVENT QUITE WORKED OUT HOW THE QUOTING THING WORKS SO I AM GOING TO REPLY IN CAPS JUST TO AVOID CONFUSION

not true.

ram mohon roy was the father of modern india. way way ahead of his time
According to you he is but not according to all Hindus.

SO HOW COME ALL HINDUS SEND THEIR DAUGHTERS TO STUDY AND DONT MARRY THEM OFF AT 14 AND WIDOWS DONT END UP SATI-FIED.

LEARN TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE ITS DUE INSTEAD OF WITCH-HUNTING.

neither kesab chandra sen nor ram mohon roy became X-ian.
both manage to subtly incorporate the "+ves" of christianity into hinduism and pacakage hinduism in such a way that hindus didnt feel enamoured with christianity. read what koenraad elst has to say about this tactical move.

Lets see what happened to Brahmo Samaj after Ram Mohan Roy's death under the leadership of Keshab Chandra Sen:

By the time he reached Calcutta, the Brahmo Samaj had split into two. A minority consisting of those who wanted to retain their. Hindu identity had remained with the Adi Brahmo Samaj led by Debendra Nath Tagore and Rajnarayan Bose. The majority had walked away with Keshub Chunder Sen who had formed his Church of the New Dispensation (NababidhAna) and started dreaming of becoming the prophet of a new world religion. Dayananda saw with his own eyes how infatuation with Christ had reduced Keshub Chunder to a sanctimonious humbug and turned him into a rootless cosmopolitan. He also witnessed how Debendra Nath Tagore was finding it difficult to retrieve the ground lost when the Adi Brahmo Samaj had repudiated the fundamental tenets of Hinduism - the authority of the Vedas, VarNAshrama-dharma, the doctrine of rebirth, etc. The only consolation he found in Calcutta was a lecture, The Superiority of Hinduism, which Rajnarayan Bose had delivered earlier and a copy of which was presented to him.

HMM OK. I WAS TALKING ABOUT RAM MOHON ROY.
BUT EVEN THEN, KESAB CHANDRA SEN HAD MORE TO HIM THE HIS MYOPIC LOVE AND INFATUATION FOR CHRISTIANITY.

FINALLY ITS CHANDRA AND NOT CHUNDER, JUST LIKE ITS INDRA AND NOT INDER.
STOP CORRUPTING SANSKRIT.

Dayananda wrote a critique of Brahmoism soon after he returned from Calcutta. It was incorporated in Chapter XI of his SatyArthaprakAsha which was first published from Varanasi in the beginning of 1875. The Brahmos, he wrote, have very little love of their own country left in them. Far from taking pride in their country and their ancestors, they find fault with both. They praise Christians and Englishmen in their public speeches while they do not even mention the rishis of old. They proclaim that since creation and till today, no wise man has been born outside the British fold. The people of Aryavarta have always been idiotic, according to them. They believe that Hindus have never made any progress. Far from honouring the Vedas, they never hesitate in denouncing those venerable Shastras. The book which describes the tenets of Brahmoism has place for Moses, Jesus and Muhammad who are praised as great saints, but it has no place for any ancient rishi, howsoever great. They denounce Hindu society for its division in castes, but they never notice the racial consciousness which runs deep in European society. They claim that their search is only for truth, whether it is found in the Bible or the Quran, but they manage to miss the truth which is in their own Vedic heritage. They are running after Jesus without knowing what their own rishis have bequeathed to them. They discard the sacred thread as if it were heavier than the foreign liveries they love to wear. In the process, they have become beggars in their own home and can do no good either to themselves or to those among whom they live.

BRAHMO-ISM NEED NOT BE RIGHT.
THE POINT IS THAT IT ACTED AS A CHECK AGAINST THE APPEAL OF CHRISTIANITY.
AND ALSO SOME OF THE FINER POINTS OF HINDUISM AS SPECIFIED IN THE VEDAS WERE REVIVED WHILE CRAPPIER PARTS LIKE SUPERSTITION AND IDOL WORSHIP (SOME BLACK STONE IS FOUND IN SOME CORNER - NEXT DAY IT BECOMES A TEMPLE. THAT KIND OF CRAP) WAS WEEDED OUT.


AND HAVING MET MANY BRAHMOS I DONT AGREE WITH WHAT DAYANAND HAS TO SAY.
IF ANYTHING THE BRAHMOS DERIVE THEIR RELIGION FROM THE VEDS AND ONLY THAT. BRAHMO SAMAJ WAS AN ATTEMPT TO REVIVE VEDIC HINDUISM BY CHUCKING ALL RITUALS AND ALSO SIMULTANEOUSLY NEGATE THE LURE OF THE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS.

THAT THE PEOPLE OF BENGAL NEVER FOUND MUCH INTEREST IN ACCEPTING XIANITY AS OPPOSED TO SOME OTHER PARTS OF INDIA, AND THAT THE LEVEL OF SOCIAL JUSTICE IN BENGAL HAS ALWAYS BEEN VERY HIGH EVER SINCE THE BRAHMO SAMAJ, VINDICATES THAT THE INTENTIONS OF THE SAMAJ WAS SUCCESSFUL.

DAYANAD PROLLY ONLY SAW THE MEANS ADOPTED AND NOT THE ENDS THAT THEY TRIED TO ACHIEVE.

WELL TREES ARE KNOWN BY THEUR FRUITS. (READ ENDS)

http://voiceofdharma.com/books/hhce/Ch11.htm
Let us see what Arun Shourie has to say about Keshab:
Similarly, while Ram Mohan Roy is mentioned, while Keshab Chandra Sen -- in whom Max Muller had seen such hope of Christianizing India -- is mentioned, while Devendra Nath Tagore is mentioned in this "History of Civilization", Bankim Chandra is not mentioned!

I FAIL TO SEE HOW IT UNDERMINES KESAB CHANDRA SEN THAT MAX MULLER HAD A LOT OF EXPECTATION FROM HIM.
JUST HIS LUCK.
IF THIS ALLEGATION WERE TRUE BENGAL WOULD HAVE HAD A X-IAN POPULATION LIKE THAT OF TAMIL NADU, NAGALAND OR KERELA.
BUT PRETTY MUCH THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE - COS THE BRAHMO SAMAJ MANAGED TO MAKE HINDUS AWARE OF THE BETTER ASPECTS OF HINDUISM WHILEST ENCOURAGING THEM TO CHUCH THE CORRUPTIONS.

http://arunshourie.voiceofdharma.com/art...980901.htm
Since you are always talking about the poms it may interest you to know that your great Keshab Chandra Sen was a pucca loyalist who wanted British rule to flourish in India (this after having seen what was done to Bengal under the British), the following is from Elst:
Indian loyalists justified the British presence on the same grounds, e.g. Keshab Chandra Sen, leader of the reformist movement Brahmo Samaj (mid-19th century), welcomed the British advent as a reunion with his Aryan cousins: “In the advent of the English nation in India we see a reunion of parted cousins, the descendants of two different families of the ancient Aryan race”

HE WAS RIGHT THOUGH. IN A WAY HE DIDNT EVEN SUSPECT.
OUT OF INDIA THEORY.

AND YES KESHAB CHANDRA SEN WAS NOT QUITE A BOSE. NOR WERE VERY MANY OTHER INDIANS.

http://voiceofdharma.com/books/ait/ch11.htm#4a

like i said, and koenraad elst and even bal thakeray (!!!!) had said, we should be cautious about how non-western we should be. for a bit much of it, would mean that we keep the electric bulb out of indian also !!:

The same Elst repeatedly points out how the so called reform movements internalised every missionary myth and then tried to build up Hinduism as monotheist when it certainly wasnt. The following is what Elst has to say:
IT WASNT. BUT THIS PACKAGING TOOK AWAY THE LURE OF MONOTHEISTIC RELIGION.

Thus, the Christian and Muslim emphasis on monotheism and condemnation of polytheism has been interio­rized by Hindu reform movements even as the latter were trying to counter Christian power in India.

YES.
IT WAS TO COUNTER THE CHRISTIAN POWER IN INDIA THAT THE PACKAGING WAS DONE THUS.

Instead of defending Hindu polytheism against the missionary vilifica­tion of "idolatry", the Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj movements claimed that monotheism was indeed right and polytheism was indeed wrong, but that Hinduism, properly understood, is more monotheist that Christianity and Islam.


A BRILLIANT CON JOB !!

TRYING THE UPHILL ROUTE OF EXPLAINING THAT POLYTHEISM IS RIGHT OR MONOTHEISM ISNT RIGHT PER SE (NEITHER IS RIGHT.. COS WE DONT KNOW FOR SURE) WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT. MAY LOOK EASY NOW BUT WHEN YOUR EDUCATION SYSTEM AND THE REINS OF YOUR COUNTRY ARE WITH ANOTHER PEOPLE, ITS VERY TOUGH.

As the historian Shrikant Talageri has remarked, this is as if an Indian were to say: "The colonial racists were correct in assuming the superior­ity of white skins over brown skins, but Indians have whiter skins than Europeans."


YES. THE ONES WHO TRADE GIFTS WITH DUKES AND PLAY POLO WITH THEM CERTAINLY DO.

AND NOT JUST INDIANS, WHENEVER SOMEONE MANAGES TO MAKE THE NEXT HIGHER MARK, HE/SHE GETS A SUPERIORITY COMPLEX.

WE SEE IT REGULARLY AMONGST INDIANS WHO GO TO USA OR THE WEST. THEY GROW WINGS AND THINK THEY ARE A SPECIAL SOMETHING, PROLLY MORE THAN AN AMERICAN WOULD TOO.

http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/book.../section10.html
hinduism, with the DEEP caste system as it used to be back than at least (and continues to be in up and bihar), was anything but democratic, even less egalitarian.
Firstly no religion is egalitarian,

WHEN I SAY A RELIGION IS EGALITARIAN, I MEAN THAT THE RELIGION DOES NOT HAVE BETTER FOLLOWERS AND LESSER FOLLOWERS (EG BRAHMINS AND S.C.'s).

I CERTAINLY DONT MEAN TO SAY THE ENTIRE CORPUS OF FOLLOWERS OF THAT RELIGION ARE AT THE SAME SOCIO-ECONOMIC LEVEL !!!

STOP MISCONSTRUING ME.

at that time in your

WHERE DID YOU GET THE "YOUR" ???

so called egalitarian England

AND WHEE DID YOU GET THIS TOO ??

there were tremendous class differences and great poverty among lower classes (and white xtians were practicing slavery and were justifying it using the Bible),

YES. BUT CHRISTIANITY DOES NOT HAVE LOWER CHRISTIANS AND HIGHER.
SLAVERY WAS COS OF SKIN COLOUR DIFFERENCE.
NONE OF THE ABRAHAMIC SOCIETIES ARE DIVIDED BY BIRTH.

atleast in India all castes were allowed to educate themselves as pointed out in Dharampals writings, it is time Hindus stop self hating themselves and their religion.

VERY PROPHETIC !!

WHAT MAKES YOU SURMISE THAT I HATE IT THAT I AM HINDU AND THAT I HATE HINDUISM ??

the weaknesses of hinduism are preciselyt the strengths of islam and christianity, which is why people are attracted to it. for all muslims pray together and 'dalit muslims" are not asked to keep away. for all christians can read the scriptures and go for education and not just the brahmins amongst them.

You read too many missionary websites it seems, your dalit saviour Ambedkar pointed out the contempt with which low caste Muslims were treated, Dalit Christians have separate burial grounds and churches to this day and what is preventing non Brahmins from reading the scriptures in this day, there are several english translations available of scriptures and anyone can read them, if they are too lazy to read then why blame Brahmins, if Brahmins can open their own schools for teaching Vedas then why can't other castes do the same instead of blaming Brahmins (exactly the approach Sri Narayan Guru tried successfully in Kerala).

THE OTHER DAY I ASKED YOU IF YOU WERE VIRGIN TO THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND TODAY I THINK I GOT THE ANSWER.

ITS ONE THING TO POINT OUT THAT LOWER CASTRE CONEVERTS INTO ISLAM AND x-IANITY ARE MISTREATED - AND QUITE ANOTHER TO PROVE THAT THEIR BOOKS SAY THEY SHOULD SEGREGATE.

BESIDES INDIA IS THE ONLY COUNTRY WHERE THIS SEGREGATION TAKES PLACE AMONGST MUSLIMS AND CHRISTIANS - SO I HAVE TO CONCLUDE THAT THIS IS AN ASPECT THEY LEARNT FROM HINDUS AND DOESNT EXIST IN THEIR RELIGIONS PER SE'.

ram mohon roy, apart from being the father of modern india, was also one of the fathers of the bengal renaissance.
For you he maybe but to me he is a half xtianised Hindu just like Gandhi was.

WELL THEN STOP SENDING YOUR DAUGHTER TO SCHOOL, MARRY YOUR SIS AT 13 AND REMEMBER THE SATI BIT TOO WHEN THE TIME FOR THAT COMES.

ALL THE VERY BEST.