Breaking Posts

6/trending/recent
Type Here to Get Search Results !

Who damaged Hinduism the most? A comparative study of Bengal and Goa

 



Image credits: TempleNet


©  Subhas Mitra 

This question often comes to my mind but unable to find any Concrete or substantiated evidence to conclude. I read many eminent people who write:

a. Muslim invaders killed & tortured Hindus and destroyed Temples, Monuments, and burnt libraries but could not reach core Hinduism and hence their damaging effects were very well under Hindu control till the British prepared Gandhi-Nehru, Jinnah, and communists.  

b. Christians on the other hand, right from the 16th century, before Portuguese/ British ruled India, learned Sanskrit, Pali, and Tamil to get entry right into the heart of Hinduism, The Vedas. Then they taught us their manufactured Hinduism anew and made us Brown Sahib, Robotic & Zombie Hindus whose control is in Cambridge/ Oxford/ Harvard (even today as per “Snakes in the Ganga”, A Book by Rajiv Malhotra). They presented Muslims as Hindu Sadhu as well as Christian evangelists as “Hindu Philosophers like Constantine Joseph Beschi ( 1680 – 1747), also known under his Tamil name of Vīramāmunivar, was an Italian Jesuit priest, Samuel Vedanayagam Pillai (1826–1889), also known as Mayavaram Vedanayagam Pillai, was an Indian civil servant, Tamil poet, novelist and social worker in Tamil Nadu.

c. Bengal projected Charles Freer Andrews (1871 – 1940), an Anglican priest and Christian missionary as an Indian Patriot & freedom fighter and “Deshbadndhu”. Henry Louis Vivian Derozio (1809 – 1831) was assistant headmaster of Hindu College, Kolkata who taught “religious skepticism” to Hindus and he was called a FREE THINKER. 

d. It might have been like calling Mother Teresa a social worker which she denied.

Hindus even today are unwilling to accept that an Abrahamic theocratic person of any religion is forbidden by their respective books to appreciate, glorify, promote or stand for the cause of an idolater heathen/Kefir/Kufr. 

 Yes, they can do it under DECEPTION sanctioned by their books to entice for conversion or damage heathen/kefir.


But is it not true that after Raja Dahir lost it was Buddhist (mostly) Monks who accorded non-violence hospitality to Muslims and became conducive to inviting them to Kashmir, Afghanistan, and Swat valley? Is it not true that whichever part of India fell under Buddhist rule turned into Islamic states like Afghanistan, Multan, Khaibar-Paktunistan, Kashmir, and Pal Dynasty-ruled areas?  Also Jainism, particularly, in parts of Karnataka and Bengal (Purulia/ Birbhum/Murshidabad )  failed to withstand Islamic force conversion.

My personal opinion is, Hindus failed to foresee the long-term effects of Buddhist ATHEISTIC teaching/education as we have failed to differentiate the meaning of secularism, Inculturation, indoctrination, enculturation, Theology, and Dawah** (Arabic word).

 ** These are means of taking non-believers away from their respective beliefs and then inviting them for conversion. 



Here is an example of Buddhist Bengal and non-Buddhist Goa:


 

Goa:

It is an ancient land that went by the name Gomanchala, Gopakapattana, Gopakapattam, Gopakapuri, Govapuri, Govem, and Gomantak.

The Hindu Kadamba dynasty rule till 1347.

Bahmani Sultanate (1350-70,) = 20 years

Vijaynagar dynasty till  (1469-92)

Bijapur Sultanate (1492-1510) =18 years

Portuguese rule (1510–1961) = 451 years with Inquisition.

Goa is under the Uniform Civil Code (no poison of secularism).



Buddhist Rule:



I could not find any but there were Viharas in modern Divachali or ancient Dipakavishaya, Lamgaon or ancient Lamagrama and some other places and Temples found at Arambol (Harahara), Bandora (Bandivataka), Margao (Mathagrama) and Rivona (Rishivana).



What we find in 2011:


               

a. Hindu 66.08% , Christian  - 25.10% , Muslim - 8.33%

b. Our eminent Architect - Charles Mark Correa condemns Inquisition.

c. Mario Miranda is not only a Padma Bhushan awardee but no less nationalist than Savi Rodricks and others.

d. Catholics took 17 seats out of 40 assembly seats and 7 of them for the BJP.

e. 16 Sep 2022 more Christian MLAs joined BJP the nationalist party.


                                       : Bengal:

 

Bengal Presidency or Subah Bangal :



a. The Pala dynasty of Buddhist rule from 750 AD to 1159 AD =  Atheist  rule 409 years

b. The Sen dynast, Hindu rules  -1070 AD to 1230 AD  = Hindu rule   160 years

c. Bakhtiyar Khalji     -   1204 (1206) to 1700   =  Sharia Rule =  496 years

d. EIC/ British rule  _ 1700 to 1947    Protestant colonialism     =  250 year (appx)

West Bengal was born as a “Hindu Homeland” but the rule went to the SECULAR congress (for whom No Religion for Hindus) who almost conceded to give East Pakistan up to the Hooghly River.



Buddhist Bengal:  


 

Their Capital city: 

a. Bikrampur near Dhaka is now known as Munshiganj and only 4000 Hindus are still there to experience Bangladesh secularism.

b. Gaur: which is WB but is a Muslim Majority district and name is Maldah where a couple of month back some Hindu males were kidnapped by Muslims and their families were pressured to convert to Islam. Those ladies were seen protesting on city roads as shown on TV.  ( No sign of Hindu restlessness) 


West Bengal has some Buddhist Orgs but their fiefdom in East Bengal has almost vanished except for some in Chittagong and Hilly Chittagong where they are under duel (Muslim & Christian) conversion networks as per Bangladesh media reports.


a. Bauddha Dharmankur Sabha, Kolkata

b. Bhutia Busty Monastery, Darjeeling

c. Ghum Monastery, Darjeeling

d. Mag-Dhog Yolmowa Monastery, Darjeeling

c. Tharpa Choling Monastery, Kalimpong

d. Zang Dhok Palri Phodang, Kalimpong


 

 

Religious Demography of Hindu Home Land WB: 


She started her journey with 9.2 to 12 % non-Hindu but by 2011 Muslims alone has gone up to 37 % (officially excluding illegal infiltrators and invited Rohingyas).

Muslims opted for East Pakistan and started returning even before the Nehru-Liaqat Ali pact but Hindus are even today coming from their dreamland Bangladesh.

Beef-eating Hindus are bigger enemies of Hindus than Christian.  

 


Comparison of TWO provinces:

The Abrahamic rule in:


a. GOA- 489 years. Hindu in 2011- 66.08%.

b. Both Bengal 746 years – Hindus – 31.07%

c. Goa has undergone a brutal Inquisition with Hindu massacre under Papal Orders

d. Bengal had no such blood bath for conversion (As per R C Majumder, Jadunath Sarkar & Syed Mustafa Ali).

     


Historical background:

With the end of the Mauryan Empire (322-185) BCE ruler of Magadh ruled both Goa (thereafter part of Kadamba & other Hindu dynasties) and Bengal went under the Gupta emperor patronized Buddhism also.  

After Asoka’s anti-Hindu stands got stronger, Hindu kingdoms were going weaker except Assam where Indo-Chinese rulers proved formidable and The Palas of Kamrup were “Hindus” unlike the other Palas. Muslims could not enter Assam for over 300 years till EIC tricked them).  

By 750 AD Buddhist Pal Dynasty takes over major parts of the North and eastern parts of India while no such thing happened in the South thus in Goa Muslim rule was only 20 years and Christian ruled the rest.  

409 years of Buddhist rule in Bengal broke the Hindu backbone. Authors in Bengal felt as if Hindu-Buddhists were Bhai-Bhai (brother) but I could not agree. My search makes me believe that the maximum damage Hindus of Bengal underwent was:

Caste systems were abolished or got abolished due to not only atheistic teaching /belief of rulers but Idol worshipping capped, Priesthood restrictions, and administrative restrictions on Hindus.

With choking Sanskrit (they played havoc with Language). They tried to bring a language that could unite Bihar, Assam, and Orissa and take away from Sanskrit. I am not competent to say why Raja Ram Mohan Roy hated Sanskrit. Was it because of his primary education in Madrassa or because of Pal era anti Sanskrit “Atthakatha” Buddhist commentary in Pali language (पपञ्चसूदनी नाम अट्ठकथा) or Buddhist literature caryā-padas ( চর্যাপদ ) from where the modern Bengali / Ahamia and Orya vocabularies and literature has evolved?

Abrahamic religion’s lifeline is its weekly congregation but for Hinduism, it was /is कुलधर्मा (Family tradition of KulGuru and Kul Devta) and वर्नाश्रम धर्मा that instill a sense of स्वधार्म (it is a system that gave the duty to people as mandatory towards protection and promotion/upbringing the society as a whole and also individual’s social responsibility स्वधार्म).

 Without these TWO main backbones, Hindus in Bengal might have become earthworms (that neither had bones to stand and walk nor had poisoned to bite like a snake. They might have lost the means to survive i.e. ability to resist.  Hindus lost क्षत्रिय तेज (protection of warriors) as well as ब्रह ज्ञान or कांडज्ञॅन (eternal wisdom or necessary expertise). Earthworm eats and auto-procreates, my forefather in those days might have lived for ‘food and pleasure” ( প্যাট ও চ্যাট ).  I do not know if communism got easy acceptance in Bengal for this or not. 

Hiuen Tsang (who came to India in 629 AD) described both Tora Mana and Mihirkula as atheists and killers of Buddhists and Brahmins. Takshashila University was destroyed by one of them but later they (Shet/ white Huns) only rebuilt it. Some Huns adopted Buddhism and some became Shivaites.  Some historians believe it is at this stage the university goes to Buddhists and courses like ARCHERY and MILITARY SCIENCE were excluded. My feeling is hare the KSHATRIY TEJ starts its downward journey. 

The more educated a Hindu becomes, the more resistanceless and cowardly compromiser one became. IF I AM WRONG then how 2000 teachers and 10000 students allow 17+1 dacoits to destroy their Nalanda University and burn 96 million books in 3 months?  Even today I do not find Hindus in Bengal who considers Chanakya as iconic Brahmin or Shivaji or Maharana Pratap as iconic Kshatriya. Some of our icons are British or Muslim-affiliated balloons (praised out of proportion to use them as an idol in rest of the India). 

I do not dare to go to debate whether Buddhist rule was anti-Hindu but :

a. A Prince who abandoned his kingdom and wife to demystify/disown the concept of God and Vedic rituals/ principles will be declared as an AVTAR of Visnu, might have been taken under existential Constrain. 

b. If Second Boer War (1899–1902) solder can be sent as non-violent Mahatma to sing Bhajan ( praise of )  of Sri Ram, a prince who abandon/ escape nothing, took his wife to the forest, fought wars but his so-called follower told Hindus of Noyakhali not to fight back but convert to Muslim or leave your home. In Lahore, he told Hindu/Sikh women to enjoy when Muslim rapes.

c. How can I believe Buddhist rulers did not force a sense of surrender and forgiveness against atrocities or oppression?

 

 

Hindu rule in Bengal

160 years of Hindu rule might have gone into damage control. They tried to reorient Hindu social order by importing wise men (Brahmin) and Kayasth (Brahmins clerical staff) from Kanyakubj or Kannauj, having a rich archeological and cultural heritage of those days.  Here again, no Kshatriyas were imported (as per my knowledge).  Bengal became a land of SUDRA (laborers) and I imagine these “imported people” became exploiters and did not do their social duties sincerely. They took a more extraordinary interest in their social status, forbidding forward-looking people to travel by sea, polygamy rights, etc.  (Kulin, Nobel or Aligy )   than overall reform and reorganization of lost Hidutva or replace shin of Hinduism. 


British were a boon for Hindus exactly the way those imported Hindus were. Both saved Hinduism and also exploited Hindus. British left but those imported Hindu descendants are ruling the roost.

Demographic decline of Hindus:

Abrahamic expansionism walks on TWO legs Cross & Crescent, particularly after the 1665  battle of the TWO at Gate of Vienna on 11 September ( not 9/11 ?) and the return of Spain to Christians.

Therefore in Assam, making Christian and in Bengal making Muslim could be one policy. Muslim higher birth rate is a factor.  India-American author, Pranshu Saxena believes Hindu decline was speeded up with the formation of the JAMINDAR system by Isa Khan that ended up in BARO BHUIYAs.  Jaminders took away the rights/ title of lands of poor farmers who then became unable to pay JIJIA and converted to Muslim.  He says even the legendary   BHAR ( Rajbhar of UP) of Gopal Bhar’s community of Nadia had to become Muslim for those JAMINDER’s ill acts.  He refers to RC Majumdar’s ‘History and culture of Indian people’ volume - 10. 


When I was looking at Barobhuya formation I find 1540 AD a Christian evangelist from Portuguese noted only THREE Hindu Jaminders/ petty King but from Isa Khan to Alivardy Khan there were 5 Hindus and 7 Muslim Jaminders. Most interesting is Dhaka North’s Jaminder BHAWALs who were from Bikrampur but during Sultanate Bengal, became FAZAL GAZI & ruled till SONA Gazi. After the Mughal conquest it became “Kumar” Ramendra Narayan Roy (legendary sanyasi Raja belongs to this dynasty) they ruled till 1951 at Chora Meah Bari, Bhawal, Dhaka.  

 Conclusion:

After 409 years of atheist rule of Palas, If those 160 years of Hindu rule of the Sen Dynasty were not there British would have found Bengal as Afghanistan, Iran, or Iraq.  It would have been 100% secularism of Sarat Bose, Jyoti Basu & Mamata Banerjee.  


Reference:

Ramesh Majumder

Jadunath Sarkar & Raghubir Singh

Pranshu Saxena

Richard Eaton


Disclaimer:

 This is my assessment. Historians and politicians are free to take it as fiction. 







Post a Comment

0 Comments
* Please Don't Spam Here. All the Comments are Reviewed by Admin.

Top Post Ad

Ads Bottom