Subahs Mitra : 29 Aug 2025
Foundation of Hindu Civilisation:
Fundamentals of the Sustenance of Hindu civilisation are Shastra /शास्त्रम् (Sanskrit), Shastri / शास्त्री (Pundit/scholars) and Vidhan / विधानम्, i.e. Varnashram Dharma (which makes every member protected, tutored and self-dependent without exploiting or depriving others).
But by around 600 BC, it became a hierarchy and was considered to be a monopoly practice. Buddha wanted to get rid of it.
Abrahamic antagonistic forces targeted and attacked these THREE ( Sanskrit, Brahmins and Varnasharm) to weaken and dismantle the base structure on which the HOUSE called Hinduism stands. Enemies of our civilisation have been successful in convincing even knowledgeable Hindus that Varnashram is the Caste System of 1936, and it is harmful for Hinduism.
There have been THREE Hindu enaissances in Bengal so far.
First Renascences:
After 409 years of Hindu demeaning, Atheist Buddhist rule
1. By Imported Pundits
Between 750 AD and the reign of Ballala Sena (r. 1160–1179), the Varnashram was almost absent. He brought orthodox Pundits from Kanauj and Mithila to establish the Vedic order.
It gave both good and bad mixed results:
Muslims could not convert all to Islam as they did in other Buddhist kingdoms, such as Gandhara and Kabul.
Bad result:
The Kulin (Aristocracy) system corroded the psyche of the intellectual class. Wherever the aristocratic people (Brahmins) become immoral, general society cannot maintain morality.
Second Renascence:
After 164 years of Hindu and 200 years of Muslim rule
2. By local Hindu intellectuals:
With the fall of the Sen Dynasty (1203 AD), the Vedic revivalism not only fell on its face, but it disappeared within the first 200 years of Muslim rule. During Sultan Alauddin Hussain Shah (1494–1519), Hindus were allowed to participate in literary discourses on Hindu religious subjects, but in “Bangla”, not in Sanskrit. Where Sanskrit have been an elitist and literary language for centuries in Bengal.
It was called the Mangal-Kavya Era.
Good Result:
Hindus started embracing spiritualism in rituals of Puranic deities like Manasa, Chandi, Shitala, etc., and Muslims switched to Islamic names to their traditional Hindu deities like Ban Devi to Ban BIBI, Satya Narayan to Satya Pir, etc.
Bad result:
- Hindus lost “Shatru Bodh” and the value of spiritual sanctity. Hindus of Bengal are still in the same mental status, but Muslims have gone closer to the Kefir killing of Medina.
- Satya Narayan Panchali is a literal Islamic Dwa’h leaflet. Hindus read it during Puja.
- This Islamisation of Hindu practices where propagated by Sufi Saint Shah Jalaj (1271-1346 AD).
The Third Hindu Renaissance :
This Renaissance was initiated by Christian Missionaries with evangelists. Primarily to make local Hindus ready to absorb English education under the guise of Hindu spiritual awakening and Sanskrit education.
This HR came after 1000 years of humiliation, physical and intellectual torture. The British brought great relief to Hindus.
The intoxication of this relief is still preventing Hindus from recovering from the grip of Ahimsa – Surrender, Jihad – ALTaqiya and Deception -Disguised Brainwash.
Some Hindus do not want to recove. Degree & Designation are their assets. They think they are a substitute for “white man” in WB to run the state’s affairs.
Whereas Elite Muslims did not become EIC employees but attained degrees. They availed both Congress & the Muslim League’s favour and made WEALTH on either of the borders.
Important European Evangelists initiators:
1. William Carey –Baptist Missionary: In 1792, he published a missionary manifesto, “An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the Conversion of the Heathens”. Gave the FIRST Printed Bangla book, the “Bible” for the Hindu Renaissance (HR).
2. Alexander Duff – Scottish missionary who promoted English education and rational thinking (meaning critics of native Hindu rituals and tradition in Biblical interpretation and monotheism).
3. David Hare – Philanthropist, founder of Hindu College. ( a businessman)
4. Henry Louis Vivian Derozio – Teacher at Hindu College, leader of the “Young Bengal” movement to anglicise Hindus.
5. Sir William Jones – Founder of the Asiatic Society (1784), who promoted Oriental studies and comparative philology.
Five important achievements of the Hindu Renaissance in Calcutta:
1. Founding of Hindu College (1817) and Bethune School
2. Founded the Brahmo Samaj (1828) to promote monotheism
3. Revival of Indian Literature and Language – Printing of Bengali books, newspapers, and translations enriched modern Bengali prose and poetry.
4. Evangelical activities under the name of Rise of Social Consciousness for gradual reforms in Hindu society. (Christianization or inculturation).
5. Intellectual Awakening – Emergence of a class of thinkers (Rammohan Roy (Christian Unitarianism) , Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar ( rationalism/Atheism) , Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay ( Nationalism) .
Widow Remarriage in Hinduism:
Narrative:
Warren Hastings improved the status of women in Hindu society by allowing them to remarry through an Act, known as Act XV of 1856, on the recommendation of Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar.
Fact:
Rig Veda (10.18.8):
Sanskrit text [Accents, Plain, Transliterated]:
उदी॑र्ष्वनार्य॒भि जी॑वलो॒कं ग॒तासु॑मे॒तमुप॑ शेष॒ एहि॑ । ह॒स्त॒ग्रा॒भस्य॑ दिधि॒षोस्तवे॒दं पत्यु॑र्जनि॒त्वम॒भि सं ब॑भूथ॥
उदीर्ष्वनार्यभि जीवलोकं गतासुमेतमुप शेष एहि । हस्तग्राभस्य दिधिषोस्तवेदंपत्युर्जनित्वमभि सं बभूथ ॥
English translation:
“Rise, woman, (and go) to the world of living beings; come, this man near whom you sleep is lifeless; you have enjoyed this state of being the wife of your husband, the suitor who took you by the band.”
🔹 These verses, part of a funeral hymn, have been interpreted by many scholars as sanctioning widow remarriage.
Manusmriti 5.158: and 9:65-68 refer to the chastity of a widow and remarriage and NIYOGA ( a process of conception through a form of levirate marriage ): scholars interpreted them as :
While widow remarriage is not encouraged in Manusmriti, it is not uniformly prohibited either — conditions and exceptions are outlined.
Parashara Smriti permits widow remarriage under certain conditions, especially in the Kali Yuga.
Mahabharata: No instant of remarriage, but Ambika and Ambalika, after their husband Vichitravirya dies, conceived through NIYOGA.
Chandra Banshi Kshatriya, widowed Queen Suhandi was married to a BRAHMIN, General of her dead husband, Chach of Aror, the father of Raja Dahir in 671 AD.
Badu Chandidas (1339–1399), a Brahmin in Bengal, married a widowed Rajokini – The Washerwoman, a Sudra.
Conclusion:
Most Pundits of those days were conversant with Local tradition (LOKACHAR), and Vidyasagar studied scriptures. That could be reasons why more people objected than signed his petition.
It suited the British ( Church of England) to show “Hinduism in poor” light.
A comparative note:
Christians prohibit divorce, but before the beginning of the Protestant order in England, they resorted to Live-in relationships. They did not know abortion, so all children used to be kept in an Orphanage under the care of their father or mother, provided by the Church. Biological father and Mother could see their children on Mother’s Day / Father’s Day.
Muslims have divorce and MUTTA Marriage ( marriage for a couple of hours and divorce)
Unlike Christian, whose marriage is an inseparable contract of service, care and children for the woman to her man?
Or
Muslim marriage is a contract for child-producing and service, which can be renewed any number of times during the lifetime of a Man.
Hindu marriage is a commitment as a companion for DHAMA (divinity) as well as KARMA (worldly requirements as it unfolds during lifetime), for life and beyond.
Caste system:
If they wanted to reform, why didn’t they ban it the way they did SATI? Why did the British Crown not abolish the cast system instead of making FOUR Varnas into 2000 castes and 4000 professions?
They did the Scheduled caste Act 1936, because it suited them for dismantling Hinduism through conversion. The way they did in the entire “white world” with their slave trading and apartheid in Africa, the Philippines, and East Timor, etc.
Although they still have their own outcaste called “Cagot” in France & Spain, and Dalit Christians in India.
1936 caste schedule:
Hindu caste systems are not in the Hindu scriptures or passed by the British parliament:
The Government of India Act, 1935, introduced provincial autonomy and urged Govt. to find out “Depressed Classes” (DC) among citizens.
DC was proposed by:
1. Sir Samuel Hoare, Secretary of State for India (in London)
2. Dr B. R. Ambedkar, representing the Depressed Classes at the Round Table Conferences (1930–1932)
Who did the draft of the scheduled caste?
Sir J. H. Hutton (Census Commissioner of India, 1931) and the Home Department identified and formalised caste names.
Title: The Government of India (Scheduled Castes) Order, August 1936.
• It was not debated in the Indian Legislature.
• It was issued as an “Order in Council” (a kind of decree) by the King in Council (British Parliament’s executive authority) on the advice of the Secretary of State for India.
The Fact is:
The reformation started in 600 BCE by Gautam Buddha and Mahavir Jain (They were Hindus until Emperor Asoka made them separate religions).
Human sacrifices:
The Puruṣamedha or Naramedha (“man sacrifice”) appears in the Yajurveda. But the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa explicitly says the human victim was substituted by animals or effigies.
Yet some non-Vedic tribal or Tantric practice was scantily practised till 600 BCE, when it was criminalised.
The Khond (Kondh) tribe in Odisha – Practised “Meriah” human sacrifice into the 19th century, and one British military officer, John Chambell, noticed it in the 1840s. Soon, missionary Rev. Macpherson reached for conversion.
Swami Lakshmanananda Saraswati, who was preventing conversion, was killed by Christian Missionaries under the Sonia Gandhi regime on a Janmastami night in 2008, and Dalit Shivraj Patil, MHA, gave a clean chit to the Church.
Overseas navigation Ban:
Scholars place it roughly between 600 and 300 BCE. The Krishna Yajurveda school wrote a larger “Baudhāyana Kalpasūtra” that listed “sea voyages” as an offence that could lead to the loss of one’s varna and considered “Kala Pani”, symbolising a place of spiritual darkness and impurity.
This could not be of any use for conversion / Christian expansionism. So they did not ban the practice, but the fact is, Pre-Islamic Bengal was a land of SAUDAGARs who were predominantly sea voyagers.
The Facts:
Hinduism is an evolutionary civilisation; it changes itself as and when time suits.
We needed revival, not white man’s Biblical replacement.
Child Marriage:
Even an insane person may not question that SWAMBARAM is not for child marriage. It was necessary when Muslim invaders used to loot those preadolescent Hindu girls as slaves (kaniz or bandi). Girls taken into elite Muslim households were converted to Islam.
Ibn Battuta and later chroniclers noted that slave markets in Delhi and other cities included young kafir girls. During Timur’s invasion of 1398, forced conversion was recorded alongside mass abductions.
Our Renaissance heroes raised the issue, but it did not attract much attention from “Gora Babas” (conqueror’s agents). However, the Age of Consent Acts (1891, 1929) gradually raised the legal marriage age, but the practice persisted socially.
It was not banned. Why? Perhaps it could have added to their advantage. I would have hurt Muslims.
Female infanticide:
Which Hindu ITHASA speaks of infanticide?
Not even one.
In Ramayana, PUTANA Rakshasi is projected as an infant killer but not as a practice or social evil. In the Mahabharata (Ādi Parva and Śānti Parva), there is a narrative about King Ugrasena’s subjects and later certain tribes who, fearing disgrace or poverty, killed newborn daughters. It was declared as ADHARMA. (Means Banned in modern terms).
But Gora Babas had many native disciples. One of them, SHIV CHANDRA BOSE, in his book “The Hindus as They are”, wrote that Bengal Hindus practised FEMALE infanticide.
Why did he?
Perhaps, Luke 26:24 For, if any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (NOTE THIS – TO GO CLOSE TO ‘WHITE FATHERS’ OF CALCUTTA, how much Hindus had to prove their forefathers in a bad light.
However, on further research, I found he was quoting Persian Scholar FIRISHTA, of Kazakhstan origin Muhammad Qasim Hindu Shah Astarabadi (1570 AD- 1611 AD), who met an immigrant tribe at North West Punjab who practised female infanticide.
Sati:
In recent months, Kolkata has seen THREE incidents of family group consensual suicide Pact. Could we call those ladies committed to SATI?
No.
Then why Madri, wife of Pandu, who decided to end life with her husband, is described as SATI when the epic says it was SAHAMRITYU (dying together)?
This is an over-discussed subject. I refuse a debate. Most of my readers know more than I do. But I prefer reading: “Sati: Evangelicals, Baptist Missionaries, and the Changing Colonial Discourse”, by Dr. Meenakshi Jain. This book gives evidential references rather than emotional hypotheses created in the Renaissance era in Kolkata, and erecting memorials as proof.
Note:
Did the British condemn the causes of JAUHAR of Rajasthan?
• No, not in the same strong terms as Sati.
• James Tod, in Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan (1829–32), gave a romantic, almost admiring portrayal of Jauhar.
• Is there any evidence of the British( Church ) condemning Muslim atrocities on Hindus before the 1857 anti-British uprising?
Some questions:
- How many eminent English-knowing Hindus, who were involved in the Renaissance, had SATI in their family, except Raja Ram Mohan Roy?
- “No, Aug 24 Was Not Kolkata’s 330th ‘Birthday’. And Job Charnock is not its ‘Founder'”. News18. 25 August 2020. b. “Court changes Calcutta’s history”. BBC News. 16 May 2003. C. Subarna Roychadhury (founder of the city), the family considers Job Charnock a fictional character. Could he be an insignificant Caucasian ship attendant? He is a Christian from the UK without a Date of Birth. Perhaps a SATI for his marriage was a suitable narrative.
In those days, Hindus did not allow their daughters to be married to Mleccha (foreigners).
- Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s earliest biographers, like Rev. C.S. Andrews and Sophia Dobson Collet, do not give the exact date of his father’s death, but some sources say he was born three months after his father’s death. No Sati for his mother.
- Sophia Dobson Collet, in her book “Life and Letters of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Page 184, gives details of his conversion and presentation to a Member of the House of Commons in London. Why was it needed when he reformed Hinduism?
- In the Tagore family, from “Pir Ali” background to the HR era, there was no record of SATI.
- Iswar Chandra Vidhyasagar – No Sati
- Bankim Chandra Chattopadya – No Sati
- Keshab Sen: His grandfather, Ramkamal Sen, was a pro-sati activist, and his family had a strict religious atmosphere. Yet there was no sati in the family. ( Ref wiki and Chat GPT)
- Did the following Hindu reformists, who saved Hinduism from 541 years of Muslim rule, ever talk about Sati? Or did they love Sati?
- Jaidev( 12th century) ,
- Chandidas – 1370 – 1430)
- Sri Chaitanya (1486-1533),
- Haridas Thakur (born a Muslim) (1451-1501),
- Krittibas Ojha – 1381-1461),
- Srimanta Sankardev:( 1449–1568) Assam& North Bengal
- Baba Lokenath – (1730-1890)
- Sri Hari Chand Guru Chand Thakur (1812-18780)
If there was no SAMADHI for most of those people, how did Sati need it? Could it be made to support the narrative? Could they locate a single SATI BEDI that predated EIC arrival?
Conclusion:
Western Civilisation’s foundation is the Bible. Until they discovered India and Sanskrit, they neglected their own Greek and Roman civilisation, as per the Bible. All voyages of Vasco de Gama, Columbus, and Capt. Cook, etc., were sponsored by the King of Portugal and the Queen of Spain, and were under the authority of Papal bulls (Fatwa).
We read in books that they were explorer, adventurers, businessmen, etc., under Deuteronomy deception (Rajiv Malhotra).
They set out all directions not only for food and wealth, but to destroy existing civilisation and establish their “State of the Art” civilisation from heaven.
They did not come to reform Paganism.
subhasmitra.co.in 
You must be logged in to post a comment.