--- In mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com, "Avijit Roy" wrote:
>
>
> WRT: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/23560
>
> Nowadays I try to avoid responding to such useless thread on
> religion, however, Mr Ashok Kumawat's very superficial response to
> the scholarly write-up of Mr. Narandra Nath compelled me to write
> something on this issue. Here is my point by point rebuttal.
>
> [Ashok]
>
> The fundamental and serious mistake done by the writer of this
> article is Understanding of scriptures in Illogical way.
>
> [Response] Amusingly, I found quite opposite. I found plain honesty
> and accuracy in Ramendra Nath's arguments while he targeted not
> just Hindu fundamentalism vaguely, but questions boldly against the
> oppressive verses of the dogma (Hinduism) itself. No doubt his
write-
> up is the honest, rational and analytical criticism of Hinduism and
> its tenets. We can cite numerous incidents from the past like widow
> burning, cast problem, discrimination towards women in traditional
> hindu law or even very recent example of Babri Masjid demolition
> along with Gujarat riot that should serve as the eye-opener for
exposing
> the real face of Vedic fanaticism time to time. Like many of the
> islamists, the apologists of Hinduism also dishonestly put a blame-
> game on `Hindu fundamentalists' like Advani, Bajpeyee, or RSS by
> insisting that the those radical extremism had nothing to do with
> real Hinduism - "Hinduism is tolerant" they always
> claimed, "Hinduism is all-encompassing, etc." [ see ... Islamists
> also claim in the similar tone that Bin Laden, Al-Quaeda or Jamat
> has nothing to do with their real "peaceful Islam"]. How hollow
these
> claims while an honest scrutiny of hateful Hindu scriptures (Vedas,
> Manushanghita etc.) or Islamic scriptures (Quran and Hadith etc)
> with a rational mind exposes nakedly the real source of
> fundamentalism to all. How can one be silent and blame solely the
> fundamentalists while "holy scripture" itself suggests that Shudras
> are not entitled to philosophical knowledge or Shudras as well as
> women of dwija varnas are denied the right to study Vedas?
> Ramadranath has done a splendid job in scrutinizing the hateful
> dogma and pointing his finger, no doubt!
>
> [Ashok]
>
> Take one example- He defines the Varna-Vyavastha as Birth-Based.
But
> that si totally against what said in Scriptures. The Varna-
Vyavastha
> was TOTALLY based on Virtue and qualities (Gun-Karma-Swabhav).
>
> [Response]
>
> Really? Then please clarify why the hell "all-encompassing" Hindu
> God had to create Brahmins from mouth, Kshatriyas from hands,
> Vaishyas from thighs and Shudras from feet respectively? Why not
> creating Shudras from mouth and Bhrahmins from feet instead? Please
> note that apart than Manushanghita, the first reference to varna
> (class based on birth or caste) is to be found in the Purusha-Sukta
> of the Rig Veda too, and it was solely birth-based. Manusmriti
> states quite clearly that having originated from the mouth of
> Brahma, being elder and being the repository of the Vedas; Brahmins
> are the masters of the entire universe [MS I: 93,]. Please do not
> misinterpret the plain facts.
>
> Again, If it is not birth-based, then, take this example - In
> Ramayana, Ram kills Shambuka, a Shudra simply because he was
> performing ascetic exercises which he was not supposed to do as he
> was a Shudra by birth. How funny! Where is your gun, karma, quality?
>
> In Mahabharata, Dronacharya refuses to teach archery to Eklavya,
> because he was not a Kshatriya by birth. What a noble deed!
>
> Quite expectedly you ignored these facts.
>
> [Ashok]
>
> I am giving here direct Proof and evidence to prove my statements
> above- According to- MANU 2: 28 "A man does not become a Braahman
> because his body was the product of the reproductive .... these
> things go make a Braahman" MANU 2: 28.
>
> One can see how the Varna-Vyvastha was based on (on birth or
> Qualities/Karma. And also he sanctions all four VARNAs to read
VEDas
> and other scriptures equally.
>
> [response] Again apologetic interpretation. The verse you quoted is
> nothing but a lesson - "how to be a good brahmin" [and nothing
> else], however, despite your hard effort, you could not deny the
> facts - as per scripture, a Sudra has no right even to listen to
the
> Veda. Recitation of or listening to this sacred book is exclusively
> a privilege of the Aryan Hindus, you know this right? You also
know
> that a Brahman should never be the guru of a Sudra. A Sudra is
> debarred from marrying a woman of the higher castes. These are all
> explicitly stated in those "holy scriptures". Any one who is
> concerned knows that Dalits (Untouchables), even today are the most
> pitiable victims of hindu society. According to Manu
> Smriti, 'Outcasted persons have no share in inheritance.' The
> orthodox Brahmans still believe, if the shadow of a Dalit falls on
> them, they are polluted and will have to purify them by sprinkling
> over themse1ves water from the holy river, the Ganges. These are
> just plain facts, don't just try to ignore bluntly.
>
> [Ashoke]
>
> The Four Varnas were totally Rational- to denote one's DUTY of life
> as per qualities.
>
> [response] In this "kali Jug" even the most irrational people are
> allowed to use the prestigious word "rational" to defend their
> blind faith, eh?
>
> [Ashoke]
>
> Dear members, Even in practical life this is totally logical- If
> some person is more Qualified in trade/merchantship, let him
> call 'Vaishya' and let him him do that work as one of prime duty.
>
> [Response] Hmm... I found the answer from Ramanda's original write-
> up. Take the example of Gandhi himself. He was a "bania" by caste.
> Yet, in spite of some serious aberrations such as supporting varna-
> vyavastha based on birth and linking politics with religion, he
> performed fairly well in the role of a national leader. It would
> have been a great loss for the nation if he literally followed your
> advise - "let him call 'Vaishya' and let him him do that work as
one
> of prime duty.". If Gandhi followed your advise, he would have been
> confined to running a grocery shop.
----------------------------------------
Dear Intelligent friends,
This man Ramendranath twists facts. For example :
1)
Bhishma gave the assignment to Dronacharya to teach the Kaurava and
the Pandava princes. Drona taught these princes and his son
Ashwatthama and did not teach any other kshatriya student.Now
Ramendranath tells the lie that Drona refused to accept Ekalavya as
the latter was not Kshatriya. Ask him to give the reference to the
verse in the Mahabharata, where did Vedavyasa say that he refused
Ekalavya as the latter was not a Kshatriya.
Ekalavya then learned on his own but claimed that he was Drna's
student. A preposterous lie and he deserved punishment for that. If
someone reads a book by Harvard professor can that person claim that
he is Harvard-educated? Drona was kind that he asked for one thumb
from a savyasachi (ambidexterous. person. Even after Drona's
punishment he was not incapacitated as he was ambidexterous and he
died fighting in a war subsequently.
2)
Ramendranath does not know that Satyakama, a son of a fallen woman,
was also taught the Vedas. He talks about Sambooka. As per the laws
prevailing in Lord Rama's time one has to study the Vedangas such as
Vyakarana (grammar), Nirukta (etymology) and Chanda (meter)etc.
before studying the Shruti so that one understands the true meaning
of the hymns properly and also not to corrupt the hymns, which were
transmitted only through hearing. Shrutis were only orally
transmitted. Sambooka was warned not to practice chanting the Vedic
verses as he was not initiated into these. But he did not listen and
Lord Rama, as the keeper of the law of the land, had no option but to
kill him and set aprecedednt that nobody will dare to flout the
prevailing laws. This man Ramendranath has no regard for the law of
the land and has no knowledge of the events. Just to gain publicity
he writes nonsense and thinks that the intelligent indians will
listen to him.
3)
Ramendranath is so ignorant that he does not know that Manu Smriti
was for the Satya yuga. For the subsequent yugas there are different
Smritis but he does not know that and fooloishly goes on criticising
the manu smriti, which was relevant for a short period of the
Satyayuga more than ten thousand years ago.
4) As regards the Varna-vyavastha he takes objection to the statement
that the Brahmins came from the mouth and shudra came from the feet
etc. These are analogies to explain that the Brahmin are the teachers
(uses mouth to speak to the students), the Kshatriyas are the rulers
through the strength of their arms holds weapons etc. in hand), the
Vaishyas have to look after providing food and clothes etc and the
Shudras are to do the legwork. This is an eternal classification and
is everywhere even today though these may be called differently.
Ramendranath does not have the receptive capacity to understand this
simile. May be it is his anti-Hindu design and he hopes that the
other people will not discover his ignorance.
One can go on and on exposing the ignorance of Ramendranath. He
claims and that he was born Hindu and now he is not Hindu. In fact he
is anti-Hindu as he must have got converted to another religion but
he does not admit that. A Hindu need not bother at losing him as he
does not deserve to be a Hindu but a Hindu should should see that he
(Ramendranath) cannot continue his false anti-Hindu propaganda.
S.K.Bhattacharjya
------------------------------------
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:mukto-mona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:mukto-mona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mukto-mona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/