West Bengal - news and strategy thread

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Karan M » 29 May 2019 15:54

This book was written by him and note his statements on idolatry etc.
https://books.google.co.in/books?id=G3g ... &q&f=false

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 15:55

Pratyush wrote:So what is the real controversy.

That Raja was a Christian convert.

If he was then elements of Christianity would be visible in Brahma samaj.


That is there, some elements/practices of Christianity but a large part of hinduism. Mostly removing the bad practices of Hinduism that were prevalent in the society at that point of time. Removing child marriage, multiple marriage, dowry etc etc.

But mostly hinduism.

As I said, I was not aware one of my very close friends were from Brahma Samaj till i attended his wedding.

The only visible difference were, the bride and groom were wearing shoes and sitting on chairs instead of ground in full bengali hindu wedding dress including the typical headgear. Most of the rituals like yajna etc were same.

Now terming such guys and their founder as convert, "brishit agent" etc etc :roll: :roll:

This practice of going for a pure version of religion and finding excuses to term those who are 95% similar to us as "others" with some derogatory term to push htem away has been one of the historical weakness of our religion and from the whole debate it appears that we haven't learnt.
Last edited by Picklu on 29 May 2019 16:01, edited 1 time in total.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 29 May 2019 15:59

Picklu wrote:
Pratyush wrote:
I am not sure that European situation and the British role is pertinent to this discussion.

What I am sure off is that Ram Mohan Rai was aware of the social situations in his day. He was aware of the fact that Bengal and parts of India were ruled by the British. Appealing to British as being one of them is not really that surprising or unprecedented.

Okay one thought excercise for all sides of this issue.

What would Raja would have done. If instead of being a British subject. He was a Mughal subject.

How would he have approached the issues of his day.


As the Roop Kanwar incident in 1987 and the subsequent framing of law shows, there is no remedy other than penal provision by the rulers of the land for such dastardly act in the name of religion. Same is the case of Triple Talaq and Nikah Halala.

Exactly what RRR had done on that time and exactly what we are doing today.


Sati is bad no doubt. This is not about legality, morality of Sati. This is about RRR, his conversion and his loyalty. Horrible practice it was no doubt, but you don't join enemy ranks to stop a practice and then be written in history books as some 'savior'.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 29 May 2019 16:00

Pratyush wrote:So what is the real controversy.

That Raja was a Christian convert.

If he was then elements of Christianity would be visible in Brahma samaj.


Did you do any research to say that it's not visible?

EswarPrakash
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 91
Joined: 15 Aug 2016 13:22

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby EswarPrakash » 29 May 2019 16:02

BRakshaks, IMHO this is all getting massively OT. Can we get the noise down and look at the results and their impact on potential policy making please?

abhijitm
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3479
Joined: 08 Jun 2006 15:02
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby abhijitm » 29 May 2019 16:06

A power much superior when control/invade a land it first face resistance and then acceptance. Post acceptance can bring two extreme reactions from the people of the land. Some can be infatuated by the power, its culture and some continue to detest it. Both are natural reactions.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 16:08

Karthik S wrote:
Picklu wrote:
As the Roop Kanwar incident in 1987 and the subsequent framing of law shows, there is no remedy other than penal provision by the rulers of the land for such dastardly act in the name of religion. Same is the case of Triple Talaq and Nikah Halala.

Exactly what RRR had done on that time and exactly what we are doing today.


Sati is bad no doubt. This is not about legality, morality of Sati. This is about RRR, his conversion and his loyalty. Horrible practice it was no doubt, but you don't join enemy ranks to stop a practice and then be written in history books as some 'savior'.


And all I am asking for is the proof that he converted. If you read your own statement above, you are ok with him stopping the practice. All your problem seems to be he "supposedly" joined the enemy rank. As I said, there is no proof. He said good things about British and some of the Xtian religious practices and said bad things about some of the dastardly Hindu practices prevalent at that point of time, that does not make him joining the enemy rank.

Most of the people under British rule, particularly in the earlier days, has been impressed by British and their practices - both social, religious and operational. We are talking about a society 200 years ago. Most intellectuals at that point of time would have written good things about them and suggested imbibing the same in our own. If we start rejecting everyone on that basis, none will be left standing as indic. One excuse or another would be found to denigrate them. Need to resist this "more saffron-er shade win". A better approach to accommodate a larger and more liberal Hindu society have to be found.
Last edited by Picklu on 29 May 2019 16:21, edited 1 time in total.

Mukesh.Kumar
BRFite
Posts: 1004
Joined: 06 Dec 2009 14:09

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby Mukesh.Kumar » 29 May 2019 16:11

Picklu wrote:
Pathik wrote:Sourav Ganguly - Hes already got the leadership skills to steer the ship out of troubled waters. He may not be hand in glove with MB as he hasnt portrayed any direct anti BJP symptoms. Nobody in WB for that matter would have taken on Didi before the election results.

The leadership of Saurav Ganguly is untested in a situation that needs physical brawl. Based on his current avatar and character shown, he is not that kind of person by upbringing. Of course he can learn. But Rupa Ganguly, Babool Supriya, Dileep Ghosh, Mukul Roy is much more suitable as of now.


++1 to that. Additionally he has a large set of business interests and interests in cricket etc. Unlikely that he will be keen on getting into the heat and dust of political street fighting. Plus conflict of interests is another possible source of friction.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 16:16

abhijitm wrote:A power much superior when control/invade a land it first face resistance and then acceptance. Post acceptance can bring two extreme reactions from the people of the land. Some can be infatuated by the power, its culture and some continue to detest it. Both are natural reactions.


And if we lionize only those who continued to detest and demonize those who being impressed tried to brought the good practices to the masses we will stop the progress.

That RRR was impressed by British is no secret to a bong. That he created Bhahma Samaj separate from hinduism is again a no secret. Brahma Samaj added some of Xtian philosophies/practices in sanatan dharma to improve Hinduism is not a secret either. And we precisely call him a hindu reformer for it because he did change hindu society for good.

That RRR should be reviled as a british collaborator because even if what he did gave good result but it was not puritan for someone with a hindsight 200 years after, is something being resisted.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 16:30

Pratyush wrote:
Karthik S wrote:
Did you do any research to say that it's not visible?



Where in my original post said it was visible or not visible.

It's only a question for people more knowledgeable then me.


I think i am the only one who have actually seen a Brahma Samaji (might be a few other bongs in the forum but I doubt anyone else who are all ready to tag RRR as "brishit agent").

In their day to day life, as well as social customs etc you won't find them any different than a bengali hindu for most (like 95%) part. And it is vastly different between a bong hindu and a bong muslim or bong xtian.

The 5% difference is less than the difference a bong has with a kannadiga or a tamil has with a kurgi.

All the opinion, rather strong, are coming out based on what is read on internet or book. Nothing based on practical experience.
Last edited by Picklu on 29 May 2019 16:31, edited 1 time in total.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 16:31

http://uudb.org/articles/rajarammohunroy.html

Unitarian view of RRMR

Returning to Calcutta in 1815, Roy gathered an Atmiya Sabha ("Friendly Association") for "the dissemination of religious truth and the promotion of free discussions of theological subjects." The beraders (brothers) held theistic worship, studied the Hindu scriptures, and held discussions in which they called for abolition of the caste system, sati, polygamy, and dietary restrictions. In 1819 Roy, at a well-attended Sabha meeting, debated idol worship with Subramanya Sastri, a prominent Madras (now Chennai) Brahmin. His success in this, however, led to a campaign against Roy by his opponents that forced him to disband the society.

As the rules of the Atmiya Sabha prohibited members from supporting idol worship, Roy discontinued financial support of his family's religious practices. This led to a series of lawsuits, 1817-19, filed by his nephew, Govindaprasad Roy, and his widowed sister-in-law, Durga Devi, who sought to confiscate Rammohun's property on the grounds of apostasy. His mother was said to be the driving force behind these ultimately unsuccessful proceedings.

After the death of Roy's older brother, Jagamohan, in 1812, the widow had been forcibly burned alive by his family. Deeply disturbed by her death, and believing that no human beings should ever be pressured to kill themselves for any reason, he ever afterwards preached that sati should be abolished. He visited Calcutta's cremation grounds to persuade widows not to kill themselves, helped prepare a petition to the British government against sati, and wrote A Conference between an Advocate for, and an Opponent of the Practice of Burning Widows Alive, 1818 (published in Bengali and English). He based his reasoning on Hindu scriptures, tradition, and practical morality. In A Second Conference, 1820, he added arguments based upon women's rights. That women were considered lesser creatures and unworthy of being trusted to survive their husbands, he thought, was not due to their nature, but to their inferior upbringing and education. In everyday experience, he contended, they lived harsher lives and, on the whole, behaved better than men. "What I lament," reprimanded Roy, "is, that seeing the women thus dependent and exposed to every misery, you feel for them no compassion, that might exempt them from being tied down and burnt to death."

In 1815 Roy published Vedantasara, an essay in Bengali, containing paraphrases of selected sutras of the Brahmasutrabhasya. He issued a version in English, Translation of an Abridgment of the Vedant, the following year. He wrote Bengali commentaries on Kena, Isa, Katha, and Mundaka Upanishads, 1816-19, and issued English translations as well. Responding to the publications of his orthodox Hindu critics, in 1817 he wrote A Defence of Hindu Theism, published 1820, and A Second Defence of the Monotheistical System of the Veds, 1820. Although in his Vedic studies he intended to establish Hinduism as a defensible, modern religion in the face of Christian challenges, his Hindu opponents called him an atheist, a "destroyer of religion," and a "sinful modern." They also objected to his Upanishad translations, which they felt most people were incapable of understanding. As some of his enemies tried to have him killed, he was compelled to hire bodyguards.

Roy had learned about Christianity around 1816 from Baptist missionaries at Serampore, near Calcutta. The missionaries hoped to attract an influential convert; Roy sought further support for his ethical theism. In a letter to his friend, Digby, he said: "The consequence of my long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth has been, that I have found the doctrines of Christ are more conducive to moral principles, and better adapted for the use of rational beings than any others which have come to my knowledge."

In 1820 Roy wrote a book about Jesus emphasizing Christ's moral and ethical sayings. In The Precepts of Jesus: The Guide to Peace and Happiness, Roy omitted theological passages and miracle stories, which he thought would discredit Christianity in the eyes of a Hindu, or would make Jesus appear to be just another Avatar. The book was immediately denounced as a perversion of the gospel by Rev. Joshua Marshman, editor of the evangelical publication, The Friend of India. Roy was disappointed by this response and hurt by having been labeled a "heathen." He reproved Marshman for unchristian behavior and defended his distillation of Christianity vigorously in Appeal to the Christian Public in Defense of the Precepts of Jesus By A Friend of Truth. Citing the great commandments of Jesus and the behavioral prescriptions of Matthew 25, he contended that in such passages Jesus had laid out a complete path to salvation through service. Other passages, on dogma and history, he argued, "are rather calculated to do injury," by fueling religious wars and holding Christians up to ridicule. He concluded the Appeal with a prayer: "May God render religion destructive of differences and dislike between man and man, and conducive to the peace and Union of mankind."

In his Second Appeal, 1821, and Final Appeal, 1823, Roy used a historical-critical study of Christian scripture to show that Jesus was not divine and not part of the Trinity, that salvation came through the teaching of Jesus and not vicarious atonement, and that the Holy Spirit had no separate existence. He did not, however, assert that Jesus was a mere man, but a being with special powers and a status "superior even to the angels in heaven."

Roy and Baptist missionary William Adam worked together in 1821 revising a Baptist translation of the New Testament into Bengali. Although the project foundered, in the process Adam was converted to Unitarianism and the two became friends. Later that year, with a number of prominent Brahmins, including Dwarkanath Tagore, and British merchants and civil servants, Roy and Adam founded the Calcutta Unitarian Committee. Adam was the organizer, promoter and institutionalist; Roy funded the Unitarian Press, publishing in English and Bengali.

British and American Unitarians first heard of Roy as a great Hindu monotheist in 1818. The following year his Abridgment of the Vedant and Upanishad translations and commentaries were reviewed in the British Unitarian Monthly Repository. He corresponded with Thomas Belsham, Harriet Martineau, Jeremy Bentham, and Lant Carpenter. News of the Precepts controversy and of Roy's conversion of Adam arrived in America in 1822. Meanwhile, in Calcutta, Roy published William Ellery Channing's landmark sermon, "Unitarian Christianity," together with a critical review.

In 1824 Roy replied to a letter from Harvard Professor Henry Ware, Sr., who had asked "Whether it be desirable that the inhabitants of India should be converted to Christianity?" in his answer Roy hinted otherwise, saying that "I am led to believe, from reason, what is set forth in scripture, that 'in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him,' in whatever form of worship he may have been taught to glorify God."

Roy believed strongly in education for Indians, including women. He founded the English-language Anglo-Hindu School in 1822, which offered a Western-style curriculum, including science. He opposed British government-sponsored mass education in Sanskrit, claiming that this would marginalize Indians and keep them from joining the modern world. He did, however, also found the Vedanta College in 1826, to educate a few high-caste people to read Sanskrit texts. Adam was disappointed that Roy did not allow the Anglo-Hindu School to be used for Unitarian missionary purposes. Roy, on the other hand, believed that Indians, once educated to western culture, would develop the theistic ethical values he had long promoted.

Adam and Roy also disagreed over the use of Bengali in religious services. Roy believed that only Sanskrit, Persian, or English were acceptable as sacred tongues. When Adam reconstituted the Calcutta Unitarian Council in 1827 as the British Indian Unitarian Association, Roy and other Bengalis withdrew their financial support. The next year he founded a new group, the Brahmo Samaj, dedicated to one God and taking its scriptural authority from the Vedas. Brahmo Samaj allowed upper-caste Hindus to practice monotheism and universality within their own culture.

Adam reluctantly acquiesced to the creation of the Brahmo Samaj. He reported his analysis of Roy's motives to Joseph Tuckerman, a leading American Unitarian supporter of Unitarian missionary work in India and a longtime correspondent with Roy. "Rammohun Roy, I am persuaded," Adam wrote, "supports this institution [Braho samaj] not because he believes in the divine authority of the Ved, but solely as an instrument for overthrowing idolatry. To be candid, however, I must add that . . . in my mind . . . he employs Unitarian Christianity in the same way, as an instrument for spreading pure and just notions of God, without believing in the divine authority of the Gospel."

In 1829 Lord William Bentinck, Governor-General of India, after consulting with Roy, declared sati illegal. Roy assured him that this would not violate religious liberty because it was, in his estimation, an optional rite and not a true part of Hindu religion. Roy supported the government decision, briefed Bentinck on how to respond to pro-sati petitions, and wrote a tract, Abstract of the Arguments regarding the Burning of Widows Considered as a Religious Rite, 1830. In this he called sati "cruel murder, under the cloak of religion." His persuasive influence made the British ruling seem less coercive. There was, nevertheless, much opposition the new regulation. Roy's opponents formed a pro-sati organization, Dharma Sabha, 1830-38, and sent representatives to England to argue against sati's criminalization.

In 1830-31 Roy sailed to England to provide Parliament with a native Indian perspective on judicial and revenue systems in India during the debate over the renewal of the East India Company charter, to oppose repeal of the Sati Act, to lobby for funds for the Moghul emperor (who granted him the title Raja), and to make a pilgrimage to understand the heart of European civilization. When he arrived in Liverpool, Roy was greeted with great fanfare, and was honored by aristocrats, reformers, and scholars. He made friends with English Unitarians, though he made it a point to visit Christian churches of all denominations. He was visited by Lucy Aikin, Jeremy Bentham, William Godwin, and Robert Owen.

Roy's political career in England was fairly successful. The Emperor got an increase in his stipend, though not nearly as much as he had requested. Roy lobbied for equality under the law for Indian and English people, independent of religious affiliation. The Indian Jury Act was passed in 1832. He convinced Parliament to allow imported salt to compete with the salt monopoly in India. His testimony and Remarks on the Settlement in India by Europeans, 1832, led to the Charter Act of 1833, allowing Europeans to settle, without license, in certain areas of India. He was consulted by the lawyers in the sati case, and in 1832 was present during the entire three day's hearing before the Privy Council, who upheld Bentinck's law. "As we [Indians] can no longer be guilty of female murder," he rejoiced afterward, "we now deserve every improvement temporal and spiritual."

He briefly found Britain worthy as well. While in England Roy became a partisan of the 1832 Reform Bill. After it passed, he confessed that had it failed he would have renounced the country, and, writing to the Unitarian Liverpool merchant, William Rathbone, prayed that "the mighty people of England" might succeed at last in "banishing corruption and selfish interests from public proceedings."

In 1833, his political work finished, Roy was physically exhausted and in financial difficulties. His Unitarian friends, including Bristol minister Lant Carpenter, provided support. They arranged for him to stay, with his Hindu servants and his adopted son Rajaram Roy, at the home of Carpenter's daughter, Mary. Roy's general health had been poor since 1825. While in Bristol he contracted meningitis. He died saying the sacred Hindu word Om, and wearing the Brahman thread. Carpenter preached a funeral sermon to a crowd of a thousand people at Lewin's Mead Chapel. Since that time an annual remembrance service has been held at his grave in Arno's Vale Cemetery on the outskirts of Bristol. The service is conducted by the Unitarian minister in Bristol, and attended by the Indian High Commissioner.

"I feel his loss deeply," wrote William Ellery Channing. "I cannot name a stranger whom I so wished to see." Roy's poetic English translations of Vedic literature later fired the oracular imaginations of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. His greatest legacy was the dream of a universal religion based on the belief of a Divine Unity. Rabindranath Tagore declared that Roy "realized that a bond of spiritual unity links the whole of mankind."



A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 16:52

First, Second, and Final Appeal are readily available on books.google.com (as are most copyright-expired publications).
RRMR rejects the doctrines that salvation is through Christ alone, and that Christ atoned for the sins of mankind by taking the cross, and that Christ is God. He utterly demolishes Trinitarianism. To him it makes the same mistake as the Hindus did, different only in quantity (God, Holy Spirit, Jesus - God in 3 persons, and Hindus - God in 33 crore deities). Looks like he studied Greek, Hebrew and Arabic. RRMR was a strict monotheist, and he evidently thought that the many gods and avatars of Hindus had let them into the abject situation they found themselves in.

One might wonder why RRMR did not find the monotheism of Islam to be of any appeal. Perhaps a bit of his thinking is revealed here, in the closing of his Final Appeal.
Image
Last edited by A_Gupta on 29 May 2019 16:58, edited 1 time in total.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 16:55

Let me add a few colored highlight and then make your own conclusion whether he converted or simply impresses and using appropriate communication medium brought the good practices to masses.

A_Gupta wrote:http://uudb.org/articles/rajarammohunroy.html

Unitarian view of RRMR

Returning to Calcutta in 1815, Roy gathered an Atmiya Sabha ("Friendly Association") for "the dissemination of religious truth and the promotion of free discussions of theological subjects." The beraders (brothers) held theistic worship, studied the Hindu scriptures, and held discussions in which they called for abolition of the caste system, sati, polygamy, and dietary restrictions. In 1819 Roy, at a well-attended Sabha meeting, debated idol worship with Subramanya Sastri, a prominent Madras (now Chennai) Brahmin. His success in this, however, led to a campaign against Roy by his opponents that forced him to disband the society.

As the rules of the Atmiya Sabha prohibited members from supporting idol worship, Roy discontinued financial support of his family's religious practices. This led to a series of lawsuits, 1817-19, filed by his nephew, Govindaprasad Roy, and his widowed sister-in-law, Durga Devi, who sought to confiscate Rammohun's property on the grounds of apostasy. His mother was said to be the driving force behind these ultimately unsuccessful proceedings.

After the death of Roy's older brother, Jagamohan, in 1812, the widow had been forcibly burned alive by his family. Deeply disturbed by her death, and believing that no human beings should ever be pressured to kill themselves for any reason, he ever afterwards preached that sati should be abolished. He visited Calcutta's cremation grounds to persuade widows not to kill themselves, helped prepare a petition to the British government against sati, and wrote A Conference between an Advocate for, and an Opponent of the Practice of Burning Widows Alive, 1818 (published in Bengali and English). He based his reasoning on Hindu scriptures, tradition, and practical morality. In A Second Conference, 1820, he added arguments based upon women's rights. That women were considered lesser creatures and unworthy of being trusted to survive their husbands, he thought, was not due to their nature, but to their inferior upbringing and education. In everyday experience, he contended, they lived harsher lives and, on the whole, behaved better than men. "What I lament," reprimanded Roy, "is, that seeing the women thus dependent and exposed to every misery, you feel for them no compassion, that might exempt them from being tied down and burnt to death."

In 1815 Roy published Vedantasara, an essay in Bengali, containing paraphrases of selected sutras of the Brahmasutrabhasya. He issued a version in English, Translation of an Abridgment of the Vedant, the following year. He wrote Bengali commentaries on Kena, Isa, Katha, and Mundaka Upanishads, 1816-19, and issued English translations as well. Responding to the publications of his orthodox Hindu critics, in 1817 he wrote A Defence of Hindu Theism, published 1820, and A Second Defence of the Monotheistical System of the Veds, 1820. Although in his Vedic studies he intended to establish Hinduism as a defensible, modern religion in the face of Christian challenges, his Hindu opponents called him an atheist, a "destroyer of religion," and a "sinful modern." They also objected to his Upanishad translations, which they felt most people were incapable of understanding. As some of his enemies tried to have him killed, he was compelled to hire bodyguards.

Roy had learned about Christianity around 1816 from Baptist missionaries at Serampore, near Calcutta. The missionaries hoped to attract an influential convert; Roy sought further support for his ethical theism. In a letter to his friend, Digby, he said: "The consequence of my long and uninterrupted researches into religious truth has been, that I have found the doctrines of Christ are more conducive to moral principles, and better adapted for the use of rational beings than any others which have come to my knowledge."

In 1820 Roy wrote a book about Jesus emphasizing Christ's moral and ethical sayings. In The Precepts of Jesus: The Guide to Peace and Happiness, Roy omitted theological passages and miracle stories, which he thought would discredit Christianity in the eyes of a Hindu, or would make Jesus appear to be just another Avatar. The book was immediately denounced as a perversion of the gospel by Rev. Joshua Marshman, editor of the evangelical publication, The Friend of India. Roy was disappointed by this response and hurt by having been labeled a "heathen." He reproved Marshman for unchristian behavior and defended his distillation of Christianity vigorously in Appeal to the Christian Public in Defense of the Precepts of Jesus By A Friend of Truth. Citing the great commandments of Jesus and the behavioral prescriptions of Matthew 25, he contended that in such passages Jesus had laid out a complete path to salvation through service. Other passages, on dogma and history, he argued, "are rather calculated to do injury," by fueling religious wars and holding Christians up to ridicule. He concluded the Appeal with a prayer: "May God render religion destructive of differences and dislike between man and man, and conducive to the peace and Union of mankind."

In his Second Appeal, 1821, and Final Appeal, 1823, Roy used a historical-critical study of Christian scripture to show that Jesus was not divine and not part of the Trinity, that salvation came through the teaching of Jesus and not vicarious atonement, and that the Holy Spirit had no separate existence. He did not, however, assert that Jesus was a mere man, but a being with special powers and a status "superior even to the angels in heaven."

Roy and Baptist missionary William Adam worked together in 1821 revising a Baptist translation of the New Testament into Bengali. Although the project foundered, in the process Adam was converted to Unitarianism and the two became friends. Later that year, with a number of prominent Brahmins, including Dwarkanath Tagore, and British merchants and civil servants, Roy and Adam founded the Calcutta Unitarian Committee. Adam was the organizer, promoter and institutionalist; Roy funded the Unitarian Press, publishing in English and Bengali.

British and American Unitarians first heard of Roy as a great Hindu monotheist in 1818. The following year his Abridgment of the Vedant and Upanishad translations and commentaries were reviewed in the British Unitarian Monthly Repository. He corresponded with Thomas Belsham, Harriet Martineau, Jeremy Bentham, and Lant Carpenter. News of the Precepts controversy and of Roy's conversion of Adam arrived in America in 1822. Meanwhile, in Calcutta, Roy published William Ellery Channing's landmark sermon, "Unitarian Christianity," together with a critical review.

In 1824 Roy replied to a letter from Harvard Professor Henry Ware, Sr., who had asked "Whether it be desirable that the inhabitants of India should be converted to Christianity?" in his answer Roy hinted otherwise, saying that "I am led to believe, from reason, what is set forth in scripture, that 'in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him,' in whatever form of worship he may have been taught to glorify God."

Roy believed strongly in education for Indians, including women. He founded the English-language Anglo-Hindu School in 1822, which offered a Western-style curriculum, including science. He opposed British government-sponsored mass education in Sanskrit, claiming that this would marginalize Indians and keep them from joining the modern world. He did, however, also found the Vedanta College in 1826, to educate a few high-caste people to read Sanskrit texts. Adam was disappointed that Roy did not allow the Anglo-Hindu School to be used for Unitarian missionary purposes. Roy, on the other hand, believed that Indians, once educated to western culture, would develop the theistic ethical values he had long promoted.

Adam and Roy also disagreed over the use of Bengali in religious services. Roy believed that only Sanskrit, Persian, or English were acceptable as sacred tongues. When Adam reconstituted the Calcutta Unitarian Council in 1827 as the British Indian Unitarian Association, Roy and other Bengalis withdrew their financial support. The next year he founded a new group, the Brahmo Samaj, dedicated to one God and taking its scriptural authority from the Vedas. Brahmo Samaj allowed upper-caste Hindus to practice monotheism and universality within their own culture.

Adam reluctantly acquiesced to the creation of the Brahmo Samaj. He reported his analysis of Roy's motives to Joseph Tuckerman, a leading American Unitarian supporter of Unitarian missionary work in India and a longtime correspondent with Roy. "Rammohun Roy, I am persuaded," Adam wrote, "supports this institution [Braho samaj] not because he believes in the divine authority of the Ved, but solely as an instrument for overthrowing idolatry. To be candid, however, I must add that . . . in my mind . . . he employs Unitarian Christianity in the same way, as an instrument for spreading pure and just notions of God, without believing in the divine authority of the Gospel."

In 1829 Lord William Bentinck, Governor-General of India, after consulting with Roy, declared sati illegal. Roy assured him that this would not violate religious liberty because it was, in his estimation, an optional rite and not a true part of Hindu religion. Roy supported the government decision, briefed Bentinck on how to respond to pro-sati petitions, and wrote a tract, Abstract of the Arguments regarding the Burning of Widows Considered as a Religious Rite, 1830. In this he called sati "cruel murder, under the cloak of religion." His persuasive influence made the British ruling seem less coercive. There was, nevertheless, much opposition the new regulation. Roy's opponents formed a pro-sati organization, Dharma Sabha, 1830-38, and sent representatives to England to argue against sati's criminalization.

In 1830-31 Roy sailed to England to provide Parliament with a native Indian perspective on judicial and revenue systems in India during the debate over the renewal of the East India Company charter, to oppose repeal of the Sati Act, to lobby for funds for the Moghul emperor (who granted him the title Raja), and to make a pilgrimage to understand the heart of European civilization. When he arrived in Liverpool, Roy was greeted with great fanfare, and was honored by aristocrats, reformers, and scholars. He made friends with English Unitarians, though he made it a point to visit Christian churches of all denominations. He was visited by Lucy Aikin, Jeremy Bentham, William Godwin, and Robert Owen.

Roy's political career in England was fairly successful. The Emperor got an increase in his stipend, though not nearly as much as he had requested. Roy lobbied for equality under the law for Indian and English people, independent of religious affiliation. The Indian Jury Act was passed in 1832. He convinced Parliament to allow imported salt to compete with the salt monopoly in India. His testimony and Remarks on the Settlement in India by Europeans, 1832, led to the Charter Act of 1833, allowing Europeans to settle, without license, in certain areas of India. He was consulted by the lawyers in the sati case, and in 1832 was present during the entire three day's hearing before the Privy Council, who upheld Bentinck's law. "As we [Indians] can no longer be guilty of female murder," he rejoiced afterward, "we now deserve every improvement temporal and spiritual."

He briefly found Britain worthy as well. While in England Roy became a partisan of the 1832 Reform Bill. After it passed, he confessed that had it failed he would have renounced the country, and, writing to the Unitarian Liverpool merchant, William Rathbone, prayed that "the mighty people of England" might succeed at last in "banishing corruption and selfish interests from public proceedings."

In 1833, his political work finished, Roy was physically exhausted and in financial difficulties. His Unitarian friends, including Bristol minister Lant Carpenter, provided support. They arranged for him to stay, with his Hindu servants and his adopted son Rajaram Roy, at the home of Carpenter's daughter, Mary. Roy's general health had been poor since 1825. While in Bristol he contracted meningitis. He died saying the sacred Hindu word Om, and wearing the Brahman thread. Carpenter preached a funeral sermon to a crowd of a thousand people at Lewin's Mead Chapel. Since that time an annual remembrance service has been held at his grave in Arno's Vale Cemetery on the outskirts of Bristol. The service is conducted by the Unitarian minister in Bristol, and attended by the Indian High Commissioner.

"I feel his loss deeply," wrote William Ellery Channing. "I cannot name a stranger whom I so wished to see." Roy's poetic English translations of Vedic literature later fired the oracular imaginations of Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henry David Thoreau. His greatest legacy was the dream of a universal religion based on the belief of a Divine Unity. Rabindranath Tagore declared that Roy "realized that a bond of spiritual unity links the whole of mankind."



See the highlighted part and now you guys make a conclusion about his goal, what he achieved and whether he was a turncoat british agent or not.

Nothing in this above is new and all quite well known to bongs and we are abosolutely proud of him as a hindu reformer because of his overall impact to the bigger hindu society on the ground.

Are their no others? Definitely there is but he need not be brought down for the same and no, emphatically, he was not an unitary xtian. Quite the opposite, all through out he has taken enough nuanced communication to ensure that he remains an influential person to the British while avoiding being a Xtian.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 17:03

Now TI brings some other unitary xtian who claims RRR as their own and brands RRR with that as primary source.

TI is not the problem there, he is reasonable and can be argued with. The problem is the huge "hindu" fan brigade in twitter who would just shout everyone down whoever tries to counter TI.

The idiots don't understand that by their own action they are creating enmity in own rank.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 17:11

A_Gupta wrote:One might wonder why RRMR did not find the monotheism of Islam to be of any appeal. Perhaps a bit of his thinking is revealed here, in the closing of his Final Appeal.
Image


And this part is very much evident in Bankim, in his Ananda Math where the revered "Vande Mataram" was born. The exact same reasoning as the last paragraph.

Both understood that the current hinduism at that point was moribund, Islam is not a solution and the freedom and greatness lies in learning from British.

Thanks a lot A_Gupta for bringing in the sources.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 17:19

^^^ I thoroughly concur; and also think that while Twitter has its uses, best used in simple matters of fact, history or even the life of just one person, cannot be captured in the "sound bites" that is Twitter.

Anyway, Bankim Chandra Chatterjee
Chattopadhyay's commentary on the Gita was published eight years after his death and contained his comments up to the 19th Verse of Chapter 4. Through this work, he attempted to reassure Hindus who were increasingly being exposed to Western ideas. His belief was, that there was "No serious hope of progress in India except in Hinduism-reformed, regenerated and purified" {Wiki}


People need to ask what "progress", "reformed" and "purified" might mean. Everyone will have their own answers, and having an answer that differs from yours does not make a person into a "British stooge".

But the Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle in Chennai considers BCC to be a British stooge. This sword has two edges, and cuts both sides equally.

https://countercurrents.org/2017/04/ban ... rahminical
"Bankim’s ‘Bharat’ -Pro-British, Anti-Muslim And Pro-Brahminical
in Communal Harmony — by Ambedkar-Periyar Study Circle — April 9, 2017"

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 17:33

While I'm on this topic and before IB4TL, I'll just say that history is not Shruti, it should be constantly examined and rewritten. But it needs to be a serious engagement. Not of the type above, "Bankim’s ‘Bharat’ -Pro-British, Anti-Muslim And Pro-Brahminical" nor of the previously, "RRMR was a British stooge".

Supratik
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6167
Joined: 09 Nov 2005 10:21
Location: USA

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Supratik » 29 May 2019 18:50

I hope the BJP does not fall for this Vidyasagar and Raja Rammohan issues. These are CPIM traps that TMC has now adopted to show the opposition (in present case the BJP) is anti-Bengali. These are contrived issues to get the vote of the bhadralok because it seems the bhadralok and muslims are the only ones now voting the TMC. BJP should stay clear of these issues and focus on the misdeeds of the regime. Another 5% vote and the job is done.

Manish_Sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4062
Joined: 07 Sep 2009 16:17

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Manish_Sharma » 29 May 2019 19:02

Picklu ji, industrial revolution happened in britain / europe , but without learning english didn't Chinese Japanese learn to make aircrafts trains satellites, their children have been learning physics math chemistry in non-European languages and operate trains...

Our Kumbh is happening even in Yuddhishtir's times it happens every 12 years because its connected with movement of Jupiter, our Sanskrit creating Ancestors even in Yudhishthir's time were having knowledge of Jupiter's timetables,

Al Jabbar learned sanskrit and translated certain parts in Arabic from these translations Brits learned which they called 'Algebra' .

Now to same Sanskrit you or RRR have right to criticize, but Rajiv Malhotra OR BRFites don't have right to criticize RRR, who wrote such disparaging things about our Sanskrit to a foriegn imperialist exploiter Prime Minister.

British said they couldn't find 200 Chinese who were ready to kill their own for foreigners hence were never colonized.

We had Punjabis like Sikhs who fought in world wars bravely for protecting britain they refused to fight hiding in trenches like European soldiers but standing in open.... but these didn't stand and fight by side of Madan Lal Dhingra & Bhagat Singh, same punjabis had kunj behari thapar giving thanks 2 lakh rupees and saropa in the evening to general dyer for committing jallianwala bagh in the morning.

sardar sobha singh father of khushwant gave witness against Bhagat Singh, now if one condemned these people should I as a punjabi Hindu Brahmin feel hurt?

RRR tramples upon not just Sanskrit but whole heritage of our ancestors, BUT HE IS ABOVE CRITICISM?

Maybe you can tolerate Rajiv Malhotra criticism of RRR, in same spirit as you are asking for others to see RRR's despicable actions in context of? I mean if need of time was that RRR tramples upon sanskrit and civilization, then today need of time is to criticize RRR and ilk today!

Here give 7 minutes of your life and listen to this :

https://youtu.be/J_jLftsGoCs


krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5818
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby krisna » 29 May 2019 19:27

seems like a slugfest over RRR. :(

Prudent to think in terms of his times and what was happening around in his part of the India and world.

My assessment is like the sepoys of our world in today. He probably had good intentions but did not know the machination of his then rulers-britshits. He thought about Hindus and Indians but britshits screwed Indians over his shoulders. India suffered. RRR was a good man with noble intentions but with poor geopolitical knowledge overall.

Around his period- many attempts were made to convert Hindus to christianity. some parts of Bengal were not in control of british. Over 10 years spent with few hindus converting to christianity.The then governor did not agree to christian missionaries for conversions purposes and was strictly of ruling type. He was bundled out on fake corruption charges to england.
William Bentinck was brought in place thru influence of christian missionaries in Bengal. He was an evangelical christian. He favored christian missionaries efforts.

1) Atrocity literature had already started with many missionaries exaggerrating the number of sati deaths 100s times.
2) RRR was a rising star around this time. He was clear in his conscience. missionaries thought they could convert him and thru other Hindus would follow. They engaged him and thought him christinaity, funded few of his effrots. he due to his good Hindu nature opened out to them. He learnt many aspects of christinaity and they in turn about Hinduism. In fcat a couple of young christian missionaries fell in love with Hinduism. They were banished back to england for re-education. later on missionaries well versed in christinaity and ills of Hinduism training were deployed.

3) RRR was exposed to sati. He was fed exaggerated accounts thru his new christian friends. It heightened his efforts to remove it. It was not wrong per se but the issue was taken in different ways by christians to brow beat Hinduism, the effects which we are still, seeing today.

4) The english parliament as usual acted listening to one sided arguments of christian missionaries, derided the evidence presented by Hindus against the missionary propaganda etc. Today the same type is peddled by USCIR in usa disregarding the true facts on India about christians.


5) In reality at that time and also in the past- sati was very rarely done. A few sprinkles here and there. It is actually worldwide in distribution. some say it could be due to extreme grief reaction of the wife that she would die with her husband. The sati deaths statistically were less than suicides or crimes in any given region of those times. burning was due to Hindu custom when one dies.
6) it was dying out on its own in India but due to islamic invasions, resurfaced as Hindus found that islamic invaders kidnapped women and children raped and did not spare even dead women. To prevent this sati/jauhar was restarted so that islamic invaders get only ash and not a human body for defilement.

7) this practice of sati/jauhar was already dying out in new Hindu rulers territories as in Gujarat rajasthan Maharashtra and other places. many reformers and rulers were involved in it long time before RRR petitoned the british. In this respect RRR had poor geopolitical knowledege of other parts of India. he did not understand the christian missionaries nor the geoplotical history of christian expansion thru lies and subterfuge.
8) For those Hindu women who were raped and forcibly converted, were welcomed back into Hinduism and also remarried in newly Hindu territories. Something called devala smriti was in vogue those times but it decerased as muslim power waned.

7) RRR truly wanted to reform Hinduism and its practices but went to the "wolf in sheep" clothing to achieve its ends. we are facing the effects.



--------------------------------------------
Many Hindu reforms were done by Hindus themselves over centuries but never given credit.
it is always the non Hindus who are given credit. we fail to see thru this despite knowledge of these issues.


non Hindus are always thought as a belief that "it is better to have a liar and dishonest of your own religion than a good honest non believer(non muslim or non christian)
----------------------------------------------

plenty of examples can be cited.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16767
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 29 May 2019 19:47

Too much has been written on RRMR, I am not going to write another essay on this topic as I think both sides are going overboard.
I will try my best to be brief.

1. Regarding letter request for english education instead of sanskrit.


Context makes all the difference. Late medieval bengal was truly a dark era, after centuries of muslim rule hindus had lost all vitality. As a coping mechanism to being second class citizens they had become extremely inward looking and had consequently developed many societal ills and a similarly ossified education system that offered students little understanding of the suddenly changed world they found themselves in. and of course, sanskrit wasn't even the preferred language if one had to get ahead in life, farsi was.

At the same time the european/britishers were clearly materially superior in virtually all fields from science, technology, administration, legal affairs to military. They defeated hugely numerically superior Indian forces repeatedly. Remember these Indian forces were the islamic armies who in turn had dominated this region for centuries. For a person of the time they were almost as advanced as aliens !

Is it surprising that RRMR considered (rightly, IMHO) that their english education was at the root of their development and that more of the same in terms of rote learning sanskrit texts would not help Indians advance ? Does anyone think either the teachers or the reading material existed in sanskrit at the time to impart a modern education to its students ? Even to properly translate from english texts on science and math to sanskrit/bangla would have required an army of people educated in english in those disciplines.

Moreover, sanskrit college itself was quite conservative till Vidyasagar came along around 30 years later to head it (he himself was a graduate). It took a Vidyasagar to even allow non-brahmin students into the college. Before him, sanskrit was almost exclusively the preserve of brahmins.

2. Opposition to idol worship


A normal reaction to this type of situation in a defeated society is introspection, i.e 'where did we go wrong ?' and 'How is our conqueror better than us?'.
The opposition to idol worship comes from that sentiment. britishers of that era made a lot of hoopla about protestant ethics and true xtians etc. Clearly some of that would rub off onto the conquered people, RRMR included. Idol worship is a weakness and superstition as per the same missionaries and brit colonialists (who were no less jealous xtians than missionaries)
The conquered people search their own ancient texts and behold ! The Vedas do not describe idol worship. They find a pattern that matches. That we were dominant once when we too didn't practice idol worship and today we are a conquered people because we have deviated from the path of our ancestors.
And remember, at the opposite end of the sub-continent, the Arya Samaj had the same sentiment. :wink:


3. Regarding RRMR's religion and his co-written book on Jesus

There are two parts to this. Writing a book on a prophet or a saint of a religion, even a laudatory one is not proof of the author's religion.
Noted bangla author Syed Mujtaba Ali wrote a very approving essay on Ramkrishna Paramhansa, but he was not a hindu. Similarly, Kazi Nazrul Islam wrote many songs in praise of Maa Kaali. That doesn't prove anything his religion.

However, Picklu dada, one thing TI has posted is somewhat clinching; he is mentioned as a unitarian in his own book's foreword. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. Clearly, he didn't propagate xtianity (otherwise there would be no Brahmo Samaj) and yet it was xtian enough to acceptable to at least some sect of the xtians. Brahmo Samaj was a compromise solution that ended up positively influencing bengali society. People focus only on sati but that's a smaller factor IMHO. Focus on arts and culture, women's education, rejection of purdah and diminishing of caste divisiveness are some of the lasting legacies of the Brahmo's on bengali society.
So, whatever RRMR's religion was, he left a hindu society that was more egalitarian, confident of its roots and ready to face the world with new found vitality.
===================

As for the people who are saying he should have known that europeans were doing witch burnings in medieval times, are you ******' kiddin' me ??
There should be a tax on asinine comments like that. In the era of 24X7 TV and always-on wi-fi I bet you can't tell me what a basmachi is without googling and you think the 18th century bigoted brits were supplying RRMR with books on xtian excesses ?? sheesh !

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17947
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Karan M » 29 May 2019 19:50

Good overview Rahul. Can we have this on the last word on the matter and move on, I think it summarizes the issue well.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 19:55

1. RRMR's unitarianist interpretation of Christian doctrine is not accepted as Christianity by 99% of Christians. I doubt any existing church in today's Kerala or Tamil Nadu would view him as anything other than a dangerous heretic.

2. RRMR was claimed as a convert back then in 1820 after he wrote the First, Second and Final Appeals, by some British folks; but RRMR's subsequent actions clearly indicate that he was not.

Karthik S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4832
Joined: 18 Sep 2009 12:12

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Karthik S » 29 May 2019 19:57

I was watching a documentary on aghoris, saw comments, a paki thanked the invaders, he thanked them as the invaders even though murdered, pillaged, enslaved his ancestors, led him to islam. So somehow he has a moral superiority feeling now that he adopted way of life of invaders rather than clinging onto his ancient way of life. My last word.

siqir
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 66
Joined: 20 Mar 2019 08:32

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby siqir » 29 May 2019 20:05

he plainly collaborated if not instigated the brits to destroy us and whatever was left of our language and culture after the islamic invasions

cannot get worse than this

destruction in the name of making it better is also what chinese communists did to themselves

but even chinese now accept mao was 30 percent wrong or some such percentage and moving slowly to acknowledge the damage to their civilization

hnair
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3699
Joined: 03 May 2006 01:31
Location: Trivandrum

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby hnair » 29 May 2019 20:08

Rahul M, the fact that you have to write a long rebuttal is the basic problem that BJP faces for past thirty years in Kerala - lack of tailoring a message to the specific state and incorporating local historic figures into the pantheon.

If RRR has issues due to his Unitarian beliefs (frankly, some of which was goofy), then let him be polished up and adopted! Instead we have a quixotic onslaught on him based on random stuff! Why? :-o Why attack local heroes and let them slip into the opposing side's kitty?

I had asked this question in the matter of our own local heroes like Veluthampi Dalawa (fought brits till end), Pazhassi raja (fought brits till end), Sree Narayana Guru (saved a HUGE swathe from being influenced by EJ) etc. None of them matter to the BJP/RSS in Kerala and we are treated to an overdose of Shivaji day-in-dayout, much to giggles by communities who should be voting for BJP. The commies on the other hand has happily usurped Bhagat Singh and Congress has an innate skill in incorporating local heroes easily.

Hopefully BJP learn these skills, since going forward, with lots of literacy a counter-movement can be easily generated based on historic pride, since history and vocal traditions cant be erased with a flick of some gauntlet.

suryag
Forum Moderator
Posts: 3371
Joined: 11 Jan 2009 00:14

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby suryag » 29 May 2019 20:13

Folks this RRR discussion is going OT, please carry forward these in WB thread

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 20:31

Every point brought forth by TI and his supporters has been shown to have counter interpretation which is more plausible given the time and situation.

People at that time didn't have the modern knowledge facilities and the coercive power of the orthodox society in which everybody lived in was again nothing like modern days. A 90 year old person marrying 100s of girls, many below 10 years or age was the reality of hindu society at that point of time. And in the face of orthodoxy, someone intent to reform the society had two options -
a. go headfast and perish or
b. be nuanced and use all the weapons in the arsenal to achieve own objective.

RRR chose the 2nd path and today with our hindsight and tools available, we are doing an internet critique !!!

Couple of points:

a. @Rahul, it is still not a admission, it is fwd by someone else on a book. Whereas his own writings and action speaks volume and in a different direction. We don't know the circumstances behind the fwd.

b. Swami Dayanand Saraswati himself admitted the positive influence of Keshav Chandra Sen of Brahma Samaj on him and his movement.

c. People propagating the Sanskrit argument have no clue about the availability of material of mass education at that point of time. Sir Ashutosh (father of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee) managed to get the first materials to teach graduate level of "Bangla" in Bengali language in early 20th century. That is how disadvantaged we were, before that we were teaching Bengali in English. Same goes for other subjects. And such decline in sanskrit or local language didn't have anything to do RRR or British. We are simply bad in creating text book for masses while British were extremely good at it.

d. Everything bad has been said about RRR, Hindol and team have found and posted equivalent primary sources or writings from Pandit Madan Mohan Malavya, Lokmanya Tilak and many other stalwarts. As I said, going by such superficial logic, no Indic icon would be left standing. People knowing about Savarkar's mercy petition should know better.

e. A stooge is someone who for own benefit causes harm of his compatriots and advances the interest of invaders. RRR's effort on reforming hindu society is for everyone to see. At the time of RRR, hindus were dominated by Muslims who were again dominated by Xtians. By adopting english language as the medium of mass education, the result of the stature of India vis a vis Islam and British is again for everyone to see. The british didn't gain anything, there were no significant conversion in Bengal or elsewhere, Brahma Samaj by RRR, along with other social reformers actually acted as a release valve. I daresay, in Rajiv Malhotra and TI's india, lot more conversion is going on. That should tell how how insignificant Rajiv is in practice compared to RRR. And RRR died a poor, never made any fortune for himself and progency as is the hallmark of a stooge.

But despite all these, without an iota of proof RRR is "convert", "british stooge", "hinduphobic" and the people tried to point out the shoddy nature of research/reasoning "parochial" :roll:

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 20:36

hnair wrote:Picklu, please heed suryag's warning and post now on in WB thread.


May I request the admins to transfer these posts to WB thread so that we can continue on the specifics? I think the topic of rewriting history is important and would not like to loose the chain of thought and the posts that went into it. It is a symptom of much bigger danger that BJP and RW folks are not aware. You yourself have mentioned the ill-effect in Kerala.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 20:38

Regarding RRMR, please read this lecture on him by his friend and contemporary William Adams:
https://books.google.com/books?id=iLWUgQ9dN6oC
"A Lecture on the Life and Labours of Rammohan Roy", by W. Adams Esq., Commissioner of Vernacular Education in Bengal, Behar and Orissa during the Administration of Lord Wm C Bentinck, Governor General.

W.Adams does not claim RRMR as a convert.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 16767
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby Rahul M » 29 May 2019 20:55

hnair wrote:Rahul M, the fact that you have to write a long rebuttal is the basic problem that BJP faces for past thirty years in Kerala - lack of tailoring a message to the specific state and incorporating local historic figures into the pantheon. ..


The man at the top understands this but many of his footsoldiers unfortunately, dont seem to.

IMO the solution can only come from home grown intellectual cadre from these states, BJP has to actively scout and do head hunting for talent.

In fact this is a concern I have for BJP in WB, this vote was a vote against MB, not still a vote for BJP. BJP can still win 2021 but to hold it in 2026 would be much harder. I sincerely hope BJP bigwigs start searching for talent right now and run them through a filter of people like Tathagata Ray, Kanchan Gupta, Swapan Dasgupta etc.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3629
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: 2019 General Elections : Results Discussion

Postby KLNMurthy » 29 May 2019 20:56

"Judging by standards of today " is commonly used as a response to any critical look at historical figures.

Historical understanding of someone means understanding how that person was a part of what brought us from that someone's time to our present situation today. This is done through the prism of a particular historical theory that we adopt.

IOW we are tracing the chain of Karma.

This tracing has to be unsentimental and pitiless. There can be no exceptions. It's like a "taking of responsibility ", an understanding of what we did in the past that resulted in the Karmic consequences we are experiencing now. "We" collectively speaking, is represented by prominent members of that "We."

Historical, critical review is always painful and only those strong enough to get over that pain will benefit from it. They have to get past love and hate. Neither should we hate Aurangazeb nor should we love RRRoy or Gandhi when trying to understand their role and place in history.

We tend to give more importance to our emotional need for "loving " or "hating" some individual in the past than to understanding their role in why "we are like this only" which should be the only reason to study them.


Our historical theory is that old aristocracy was a part of a process that led to present day state of Hindu self-loathing.
Last edited by KLNMurthy on 29 May 2019 21:03, edited 1 time in total.

krisna
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5818
Joined: 22 Dec 2008 06:36

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby krisna » 29 May 2019 21:03

MahulR, few quotes of yours from Gen elections viewtopic.php?p=2358225#p2358225

please feel free to dissect it- giving a perspective of RRR times on big scale with relevance to today also. RRR was good man with intentions but he did not get the big picture as he was a single individual against the might of an entire organisation.

Context makes all the difference. Late medieval bengal was truly a dark era, after centuries of muslim rule hindus had lost all vitality. As a coping mechanism to being second class citizens they had become extremely inward looking and had consequently developed many societal ills and a similarly ossified education system that offered students little understanding of the suddenly changed world they found themselves in. and of course, sanskrit wasn't even the preferred language if one had to get ahead in life, farsi was.

Sanskrit was never the preferred language for many Indians for centuries. it was a sort of a link language for many Indians esp migrations within India for pilgrimages etc etc. lot opf similarities betyween local regional languages and Sanskrit made it possible . loan words freely exchanged between them. Both regional languages and sanskrit both flourished.
Islamic invasions made sure Sanskrit lost its importance as link language along with the destruction of R&D and universities we lost the technological edge. islamic rulers did not invest in R&D and universities. All these were in sanskrit mainly. Slowly sanskrit lost out on science. But traditional people used in temple rituals marriage ceemonies etc and has continued today. Hence false knowledge by everyone that sanskrit is mainly relgious mumbo jumbo. Similar stuff happened during RRR times.

At the same time the european/britishers were clearly materially superior in virtually all fields from science, technology, administration, legal affairs to military. They defeated hugely numerically superior Indian forces repeatedly. Remember these Indian forces were the islamic armies who in turn had dominated this region for centuries. For a person of the time they were almost as advanced as aliens !




euroepans/britshits gained due to ironically due to sanskrit translations of R&D science thru Arabia to Alexandria egypt to toledo spain. India deteriorated due to massive loss of R&D with Islamic invasions. temple complexes were nodal centers for wealth distribution with universities encouraged. Recall all major universitites of those times had major temple complexes in surrounding areas. some survive to this day.
Islamic rulers laughed when printing invented outside India was given to them by Europeans and chinese. They were not even aware of its importance. Then christian pope immmediatley recognised the importance, hence started massive printing of bible and other manuscripts. This included writings wrongly of other cultures to further their conversions. They also created the christian doctrine of " discovery""slavery" "amorality and non relgiosity of non christians". This nonsense is acutely felt in kerala where Hindus are blamed - nairs and others for amorality and hexuality stuff created by christian missionaries. commies have taken it to new level.

our literature sources were in palm leaves and other material prone to nature destruction due to weather floods etc. no match for english printing stuff of lies and deciet by european and missionaries

RRR time already 2-300+ years into this asymmetry warfare.
However, Picklu dada, one thing TI has posted is somewhat clinching; he is mentioned as a unitarian in his own book's foreword. Please correct me if I am wrong on this. Clearly, he didn't propagate xtianity (otherwise there would be no Brahmo Samaj) and yet it was xtian enough to acceptable to at least some sect of the xtians. Brahmo Samaj was a compromise solution that ended up positively influencing bengali society. People focus only on sati but that's a smaller factor IMHO. Focus on arts and culture, women's education, rejection of purdah and diminishing of caste divisiveness are some of the lasting legacies of the Brahmo's on bengali society.
So, whatever RRMR's religion was, he left a Hindu society that was more egalitarian, confident of its roots and ready to face the world with new found vitality.


we are facing this asymmetric warfare even today as we rely on English literature.
an example is "caste system by birth" introduced as heresy in earlier 1800s later morphed into as a "fact" irrespective of NO MENTION OF CASTE for 15000 years in literature prior to 1800s in any INDIAN Language source. Indian languages dont have "caste" or "religion" as words for millenia. Introduction of caste and religion has caused violence all over the world. India is no exception.



Today we have English as link language wherever we go but the crucial difference is we are getting wrong information thru English medium with controls elsewhere in the world inimical to our culture.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 21:17

^^ Krishna, none of these problems of local and sanskrit language can be attributed to RRR. It was an already prevalent condition at his time.

He had two options, remain in dark along with his country men or leap frog *. He choose later. Our current prosperity gives us much more strength to counter Brishit propaganda than we were at the point of time of RRR. So it's definitely progress. And part of credit of that progress should rightfully be attributed to RRR. Should we rather had remained puritan in thought and action and keep slogging along all axis while remain powerless? Same as what we were doing before RRR's time?

Same goes for the abolishing the practice of Sati. Whether it was not prevalent was immaterial. As Tathagata Roy rightly points out, there was no historically accurate documentation, we can not exactly say this many died or that many. However the point remains the same. For any sane person, even 1 such death is too many and all ethical options should be exercised to stop it at the earliest.

Ethical is the watch word in the above line and as of now, none has given conclusive evidence that his actions were detriment to India and Hindus. From all available evidence, it was exactly the opposite, enormously beneficial. Compare where Brishits were 200 years back and where they are now. Then compare the same for Islam and Hindus. It is, undoubtedly hindus who have the highest rate of positive change compared to others. Should we not acknowledge that?

On the other hand, we are getting suggestions like, while Sati was bad, it was ok to continue till a orthodox hindu approved solution is found without taking British help. Sorry, don't think that argument is valid. The current discussion nowhere proves that RRR, despite having good intention, caused harm to indic interest. From all available evidence, the answer points to the immense benefit Indian and hindu society has got due to actions of hindu reformers like RRR. Tell about yourself; as a hindu, would you rather live in a hindu society at RRR's time or today?

And no, it does not equate to Gandhi or Banditji. Many of their actions brought extreme bad result for hindus. As of now, none has given evidence that any particular act by RRR caused harm to hindu society or interest. Some of his writings in favour of english language or xtian practices are being sited as proof whereas we today follow exactly those same things in our current hindu society and we do so because they are beneficial. And similar thoughts have been written by many other hindu stalwarts like Pandit Malvya, Tilak, Bankim, Tegore, Swami Dayanand Saswati to current days Pandit Ravishankar, Baba Ramdev and Sadguru.

By all means do review all the historical facts but analyzing that should have proper intellectual rigour. Someone else claimed him to be unitary xtian so he must be a british stooge is similar intellectually to day that as most if the forum members, as supporter of NaMo, are hindu fanatics because tukde tukde gang says so.

* same as DRDO going for import of COTS components to develop local capability first. Someone interested in Military should understand the situation.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby sudeepj » 29 May 2019 21:36

Picklu wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
The Bengali Rai Bahaduri class has done a very good job of convincing an avg. middle Bengali thinking class person, that any questioning of any Bengali icon is an attack on Bengali culture and pride. No matter, that the only Bengali icons that the Rai Bahaduri class has annointed thus are carefully selected to further the centuries old cultural war leading to an ultimate westernization and christianization of India.

Why is the widespread attack on Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, by calling him or his novels communal not considered an attack on Bengal/Bengalis? Why is the widespread attack on Subhash Bose, by calling him a war criminal etc. not considered an attack on Bengal/Bengalis? Why are the contributions of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee denied their place in our nations history? Why is the sidelining of Pranab da not a chauvinistic act? How many in India know today of Bagha Jatin?

The reason is simple.. The obvious reason is ofcourse 'programming' of individuals to react a certain way.. Another important reason is, the left attacks not so much by attacking directly, but by ignoring the contributions of these other people. Left attacks by establishing hegemony in the myth making departments of culture and then erasing personas out of history! Were it not for the resistance by nationalistic forces, no one would remember Bankim, Subhash Bose, Shyama Prasad Mukherjee by the year 2000, such was the hegemonic power of the left.

From a very high level perspective, Bengal and Punjab have suffered deeply from the attacks of the Islamist and Colonialist forces on India. Long after the last red coat left the shores of India, the assault by the colonialist forces continued. Both Bengal and Punjab saw brutal COIN campaigns, supposedly by nationalist leaders! And as a result of this centuries old assault, there is a kind of stockholm syndrome among the intellectual class there. You see Punjabis making nice with Islamists, even as the Islamists commit genocide on Punjab! And you see Bengalis making nice with colonialists, even though the colonialists committed numerous genocides on Bengal, the last one, not 80 years old.

We must be kind, but firm, with Bengali and Punjabi intellectuals.. Their communities have suffered the most. And if we cant be kind to our own, rest assured, the treatment that the Islamists and the colonialists meet out to us will be much much worse.

Finally, there is indeed a yahoo class masquerading as Hindutva-wadins. If they had any association at all with the RSS, rest assured, their speech would be a lot more restrained and thoughtful. Literally, the first thing taught to you in a shakha is that you must address your peers, even your younger peers, as Ji. There is no room for pointless ego battles and aggression in the Sangh. There are also numerous false flag ops these days.. You never know, that the ultra rw handle is really ultra rw, or is merely a Congressi plant.


Sudeepj, You are absolutely right on some part and partially wrong on some other.

Let me get to the wrong part first. There are left intellectuals who has bad mouthed Bankim & Netaji but rest assured Bongs do take that as affront to their cultural icon. The ballot box winning by Left and TMC had nothing to do with what Bongs think about them. Same goes for Pranabda and Bagha Jatin. To keep their memory alive, Bongs do not need nationalistic forces from outside, they are part of Bong folk lore and I dare say none would be able to erase them. SPM is largely forgotten, true, but that's the fate of all Bong Hindu Mahasabha politicians, including father of Late Somnath Mukherjee (CPM and Speaker during UPA govt). SPM's father Sir Ashutosh is again part of Bong folklore and it would be impossible to erase the legacy. As it said, Bongs suffered a lot during the earlier political regime as there were no options who could go against the incumbent by money, muscle and influence. The current win by BJP has a large money play that switched part of the machinery to BJP along with the organisational genius of Mukul Roy. The electoral win does not indicate the cultural direction bongs as a society are going and it would be a grave danger to think that BJPs win in the election have won over bongs culturally; us bongs, in our 34 years of Left rule have learnt to compartmentalize these 2 and if not handled properly, the bongs would switch again electorally.

Now the right part. We do need to take care of our own and reject the puritans who on the drop of a hat makes our own as "others". It would be really sad to get into a the "more saffron shade win" situation in India.

WB has a lot of offshoots of Hindu religion. Brahmo is just one of them but there are 100s such which follow a mix of hindu, muslim and xtian principles. Some got wide spread recognitions like Baul but not all. There are serious social science researchers (I have a few friends there) who digs and documents the details. Most of the bongs in this forum would know the name of deities like Maa Shitala, Dharmathakur, Banabibi, ChandRay etc that are not in hintu pantheon of gods but adopted to co-opt the "antaja" class (lower strata) of people in the greater hinduism. And WB won't be the only state, I am sure people of other states who are really in touch with the lower strata would know about them. Co-opting the tribals into greater hinduism follows the same pattern.

While Brahmos have a few peculiar custom, none who have met them would deny that they are essentially part of hindus. I didn't know one of my close friend was brahmo till i attended his wedding and the only thing different than a hindu wedding was the bride and groom were sitting on chairs instead of ground while the prist does the same jagna and recites similar sanskrit mantras :)

The people who are doing rah rah against RRM and Brahmo are essentially those, who have never come across a Brahmo in real life and knows thing only from bookish perspective. And their lies the danger of using "primary source" without understanding the context. Primary source is necessary but not a sufficient condition to prove something in history. The quality of primary source and understanding the context matters. Let me give 2 example - one recent and one historical.

1. If anyone go by the primary source on NaMo from LeLi gang, his is "fascist", "divider in chief". The current age of course allows countering that with contrarian primary source but that luxury is not there always for historical figures.
2. Based on primary source, Jesus is a prophet of Islam and if you ask any muslim, none would counter that.

Similar is the logic of proving RRR as "unitary Xtian" and "hinduphobic" based on primary sources. The bongs, who are really aware of the context, would obviously protest when someone, unaware of the context, trying to prove a bengali icon to be "phobic" of majority religion of bongs. We may not show our devotion overtly and by influence of Ramakrishna Paramhansa agree that all religions leads to god but we are extremely attached to our cultural hinduism. You go anywhere in the world outside WB and you will find that a Durga Puja and a Maa Kali mandir exists whereever a group of bong resides. This far precedes the current hindu revival of creating large temples outside India, us bongs were there for long.

And this is what i dislike about the current blue on blue. Rajeev Malhotra and TrueIndology in this case are absolutely wrong to brand RRM and brahmo samaj the way they are proceeding. I dare say that following that principal we will brand a large number of hindus to be outside dharma and subconciously demand ghar wapsi from them. We can forget a greater hindu revival in such puritan way.

There is a reason hindu bongs consider RRR as icon and you can see the result even today. The hindu bongs came under EJ and Islamic conversion forces much earlier than most in south india. While the bong buddists converted enmass, see the solidity of bong hindus in that front even in current day. While the Islamic population is increasing due to a differential in birth rate and illegal crossing over from Bangladesh, historically we survived the conversion pressure on both front and a large credit goes to RRR and such hindu reformers who allowed the hinduism to evolve by taking over best practices from others and denigrating bad practices within. The brahmo samaj in that aspect to hindu is same as the relationship of shia vs sunni to some extent (not exactly but you get the point). Look at south india today with the conversion going on at full speed by both EJs as well as Mullahs and you would realize how great and far seeing those bong icons were.

And how blind Rajeev M and TrueIndology are in their intellectual ivory tower.


I agree with you that RM and TI are needlessly abrasive. I have a lot of experience of abrasive arguments which I won, but that failed to convince the other person of my argument. Whats more, my win turned the other person against me, and perhaps permanently against my point of view.

Now, I try to follow.. Satyam bruyat, Priyam bruyat.. though sometimes, past habits assert themselves.

I recently watched a video by Sankrant Sanu..

In the video, one particular observation was particularly sharp. (paraphrasing..) There is a way of thinking in India, that regards the people as broken, and wants to 'fix the people'. There is another way of thinking in India, that regards the people as more or less OK, but the state as broken and wants to 'fix the state'. I havent done any particularly deep research about RRR's thinking, but I am instinctively suspicious about narratives that regard the Indian people as broken. After having traveled around the world, its my firm belief that Indian people are among the most OK in the whole world.

Any broad brush thinking that presupposes that they were broken before persona XYZ (Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Negru, Sonia, and perhaps people like RRR) came about and 'fixed them' appears like colonial Western/Islamic propaganda. If you observe carefully, virtually all of these 'icons' have social views that look down upon the people's faith and the practice of that faith. For instance, no one says, 'Subhash Bose or Veer Savarkar fixed the Indian people's cowardice, before them, Indian people were afraid to take on the military might of the British, or organized violence from Islamist gangs..'

Dont take this to mean that I am rejecting RRR, his historic role or prominence in our story, or attacking the totality of his ideas and least of all attacking Bengal.

My issue is with the narrative that Indian people were broken before great reformers like RRR, Ishwar Chandra Vidya Sagar, Phule, Gandhi, ... came about and fixed us. That narrative feeds what I call the Lord William Bentinck syndrome.. '.. he signed an order, and abolished the Sati pratha..', and the need for random powerful Indians (e.g. Katju, DY Chandrachud, NGO brigade, social reformer brigade..) to issue orders reforming the natives.

I do agree though, that the needlessly abrasive and 'in your face' attitude of RM and TI will only turn people off. Our attitude should be to regard any dharmic person who agrees with us as an ally, and if they disagree with us, as a future ally. This is a general attitudinal issue with Indian RW.. They need to get past the 'ball of rage' stage.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 21:49

sudeepj wrote:
Dont take this to mean that I am rejecting RRR, his historic role or prominence in our story, or attacking the totality of his ideas and least of all attacking Bengal.

My issue is with the narrative that Indian people were broken before great reformers like RRR, Ishwar Chandra Vidya Sagar, Phule, Gandhi, ... came about and fixed us. That narrative feeds what I call the Lord William Bentinck syndrome.. '.. he signed an order, and abolished the Sati pratha..', and the need for random powerful Indians (e.g. Katju, DY Chandrachud, NGO brigade, social reformer brigade..) to issue orders reforming the natives.



Sudeepj, while we were and are ok in most aspect, do you think that there is no need of progress any more? Or around 200 years back, at the time of RRR, there were no need to further progress and everything were same as today? Obviously not. We are continuously evolving as a people.

While most scholars studying that period gives some credit to RRR for making such progress. Sati, Child Marriage, Dowry, Extremely poor situation of widows, Segregation by caste and untouchability, Multiple marriage where old men from upper caste marrying 100s of girls below puberty are some of the documented problems at that point of time. RRR, again has documented evidence in trying and succeeding in eradicating some of them. Does that mean a magical sign in a document did it? No, but it was an important process nonetheless. Because, otherwise, there is no point criminalizing tripple talaq by law.

I hope my view point is clear.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 21:52

I would also like to point out something else . Hindus at the time of RRR faced EJ pressure much more than what hindus at the time of Rajiv Malhotra today.

Just check and compare the success of both in preventing Xtian conversion and you would have your own answer who has done a more creditworthy job.

A_Gupta
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11153
Joined: 23 Oct 2001 11:31
Contact:

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby A_Gupta » 29 May 2019 22:07

RRMR wrote about the Hinduism he experienced:

From considerations like these it has been that I (although born a Brahmin and instructed in my youth in all the principles of that sect), being thoroughly convinced of the lamentable errors of my countrymen, have been stimulated to employ every means in my power to improve their minds, and lead them to the knowledge of a purer system of morality.

Living constantly amongst Hindoos of different sects and professions, I have had ample opportunity of observing the superstitious puerilities into which they have been thrown by their self-interested guides, who, in defiance of the law as well as of common sense, have succeeded but too well in conducting them to the temple of idolatry; and while they hid from their view the true substance of morality, have infused into their simple hearts a weak attachment for its mere shadow.

For a chief part of the theory and practice of Hindooism, I am sorry to say, is made to consist in the adoption of a peculiar mode of diet; the least aberration from which (even though the conduct of the offender may in other respects be pure and blameless) is not only visited with the severest censure, but actually punished by exclusion from the society of his family and friends. In a word, he is doomed to undergo what is commonly called loss of cast.

On the contrary, the rigid observance of this grand article of Hindoo faith is considered in so high a light as to compensate for every moral defect. Even the most atrocious crimes weigh little or nothing in the balance against the supposed guilt of its violation.

Murder, theft or perjury, though brought home to the party by a judicial sentence, so far from inducing loss of cast, is visited in their society with no peculiar mark of infamy or disgrace.

A trifling present to the Brahmin, commonly called Prayaschit, with the performance of a few idle ceremonies, are held as a sufficient atonement for all these crimes; and the delinquent is at once freed from all temporal inconvenience, as well as all dread of future retribution.

My reflections upon these solemn truths has been most painful for many years. I have never ceased to contemplate with the strongest feelings of regret, the obstinate adherence of my countrymen to their fatal system of idolatry, inducing, for the sake of propitiating their supposed Deities, the violation of every humane and social feeling. And this in various instances; but more especially in the dreadful acts of self-destruction and the immolation of the nearest relations, under the delusion of conforming to sacred religious rites.

I have never ceased, I repeat, to contemplate these practices with the strongest feelings of regret, and to view in them the moral debasement of a race, who I cannot help thinking, are capable of better things; whose susceptibility, patience and mildness of character, render them worthy of a better destiny. Under these impressions, therefore, I have been impelled to lay before them genuine translations of parts of their scripture, which inculcates not only the enlightened worship of one God, but the purest principles of morality, accompanied with such notices as I deemed requisite to oppose the arguments employed by the Brahmins in defence of their beloved system. Most earnestly do I pray that the whole may, sooner or later, prove efficient in producing on the minds of Hindoos in general, a conviction of the rationality of believing in and adoring the Supreme Being only; together with a complete perception and practice of that grand and comprehensive moral principle - Do unto others as ye would be done by.


Questions:
1. Is RRMR's description of contemporary Hindoos accurate (obsessed with the morality of diet but not of murder, perjury, etc., etc.)?
2. Assuming that the description is correct, is RRMR's diagnosis correct - that this Hindoo degeneration is because of their polytheism and idolatry? That they are misled by Brahmins?
3. Likewise, is RRMR's treatment correct - namely if Hindoos return to a strict monotheism, their morals will improve?

From my perspective, when Arsha Vidya's Dayananda Saraswati said that one does not need any religion to be a good person, it does not seem relevant how many gods you worship or don't worship and what rituals you perform or don't perform. So I don't understand RRMR's diagnosis or treatment. My modern day diagnosis would be that Hindoos at RMRR's time did not understand Shruti or Smriti. On the other hand, my view is no doubt derivable from the changes that RMRR wrought. So I wonder if the Hindoos of RMRR's time would recognize me as a Hindoo, or would straight out "induce a loss of cast".

For that matter, for you Hindoos here -- would your ancestors of the 1800s accept you as you are today, or "induce a loss of cast"? If you answer the latter, then I think criticism of RRMR needs to be more nuanced; you are after all criticizing him as a Hindu, when Hindoos of his day would not recognize you as one, and the only reason you are recognized as a Hindu today is because of the reforms RRMR and others brought about.

Picklu
BRFite
Posts: 1929
Joined: 25 Feb 2004 12:31

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby Picklu » 29 May 2019 22:10

hnair wrote:Rahul M, the fact that you have to write a long rebuttal is the basic problem that BJP faces for past thirty years in Kerala - lack of tailoring a message to the specific state and incorporating local historic figures into the pantheon.

If RRR has issues due to his Unitarian beliefs (frankly, some of which was goofy), then let him be polished up and adopted! Instead we have a quixotic onslaught on him based on random stuff! Why? :-o Why attack local heroes and let them slip into the opposing side's kitty?

I had asked this question in the matter of our own local heroes like Veluthampi Dalawa (fought brits till end), Pazhassi raja (fought brits till end), Sree Narayana Guru (saved a HUGE swathe from being influenced by EJ) etc. None of them matter to the BJP/RSS in Kerala and we are treated to an overdose of Shivaji day-in-dayout, much to giggles by communities who should be voting for BJP. The commies on the other hand has happily usurped Bhagat Singh and Congress has an innate skill in incorporating local heroes easily.

Hopefully BJP learn these skills, since going forward, with lots of literacy a counter-movement can be easily generated based on historic pride, since history and vocal traditions cant be erased with a flick of some gauntlet.


The thing is, true hindu karmayogis do this effortlessly. They have taken in so many local deities in hindu pantheon. In Bengal itself, the list would be high double digit. The way to fight EJ in the SC/ST domain is exactly the same. They are doing it by focussing on the similarity.

The major problem comes from these political intellectuals with their puritan thought. They would show how smart they are and denigrate everyone even with 1% difference. In the process, causing greater harm.

sudeepj
BRFite
Posts: 1614
Joined: 27 Nov 2008 11:25

Re: West Bengal - news and strategy thread

Postby sudeepj » 29 May 2019 22:11

Picklu wrote:
sudeepj wrote:
Dont take this to mean that I am rejecting RRR, his historic role or prominence in our story, or attacking the totality of his ideas and least of all attacking Bengal.

My issue is with the narrative that Indian people were broken before great reformers like RRR, Ishwar Chandra Vidya Sagar, Phule, Gandhi, ... came about and fixed us. That narrative feeds what I call the Lord William Bentinck syndrome.. '.. he signed an order, and abolished the Sati pratha..', and the need for random powerful Indians (e.g. Katju, DY Chandrachud, NGO brigade, social reformer brigade..) to issue orders reforming the natives.



Sudeepj, while we were and are ok in most aspect, do you think that there is no need of progress any more? Or around 200 years back, at the time of RRR, there were no need to further progress and everything were same as today? Obviously not. We are continuously evolving as a people.

While most scholars studying that period gives some credit to RRR for making such progress. ... RRR, again has documented evidence in trying and succeeding in eradicating some of them. Does that mean a magical sign in a document did it? No, but it was an important process nonetheless. Because, otherwise, there is no point criminalizing tripple talaq by law.

I hope my view point is clear.


In my view, what you are calling 'progress' is merely changes around the margins of society. What matters more is the narrative surrounding the 'progress'. For too long, Hindu society has been seen as being fundamentally broken, and needing outside intervention, if not by the Whites/Muslims, then by White/Muslim wannabes, with both these characteristics magically melding together in the persona of Negru. (I am an English man by education, muslim by culture..) :-D

Sati, Child Marriage, Dowry, Extremely poor situation of widows, Segregation by caste and untouchability, Multiple marriage where old men from upper caste marrying 100s of girls below puberty are some of the documented problems at that point of time.


I used to think like this.. but now I feel this is merely a spiel fed to us about how bad we were before the British and their reformist friends arrived. Yes, this must have happened.. but not on a scale that is suggested to us. And that similar practices were present in other societies at the time.

Who remembers the people who 'fixed' western problems such as the Salem witch trials or the rather routine and still prevalent discrimination against the Roma/pagan people in Europe today? RRR (and others like him) have a much more prominent position in our pantheon of leaders because we have an implicit assumption that the problems they fixed were essential to us. Without RRR, we would still be a bunch on uncivilized, casteist people, marrying 100s of young girls etc. etc. etc. In this way, RRR and the reformer, progressive group is given narrative dominance over the natives.

It is not right to reject RRR or accuse him of things he did not do.

It is our duty to question the narrative dominance that allows the state and the elite to 'fix the people'. We are followers of Maryada Purushottam Sri Ram, we dont need fixing.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Sagrawal and 40 guests