Follow palashbiswaskl on Twitter

PalahBiswas On Unique Identity No1.mpg

Unique Identity Number2

Please send the LINK to your Addresslist and send me every update, event, development,documents and FEEDBACK . just mail to palashbiswaskl@gmail.com

Website templates

Zia clarifies his timing of declaration of independence

What Mujib Said

Jyoti Basu is dead

Dr.BR Ambedkar

Memories of Another day

Memories of Another day
While my Parents Pulin babu and Basanti Devi were living

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Fwd: Fw: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ashok T. Jaisinghani <ashokjai@sancharnet.in>
Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:45 PM
Subject: Fw: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?
To: Stephen Knapp <srinandan@aol.com>
Cc: Prof Anantanand Rambachan <rambacha@stolaf.edu>, Dr Raj Pandit Sharma <drrsharma@o2.co.uk>


 
----- Forwarded Message -----
 
Sent: 23 May 2008 4:27 PM
Subject: Re: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?

 
Dr. Sharma,
 
    Which is disgusting and unclean: non-vegetarians eating the cooked meat or the misguided Hindus drinking the stinking cow's urine and eating dirty cow-dung and bullshit, which the Hindu fundamentalists advocate?
 
    Don't you know there are millions of micro-organisms and eggs of worms in most of the vegetarian foods? So what is clean about the fruits and vegetables which can harbor many types of micro-organisms besides the eggs of worms? As in the case of meat, it is the heat of cooking that destroys the micro-organisms and the eggs of worms while the vegetarian foods are prepared.
 
    Why are the Indian people more sick than the people in the West in spite of practising vegetarianism and untouchability? Many Indians become sick because their foods and drinks are contaminated with cow's urine and adulterated with spices containing powdered cow-dung and bullshit.
 
    Who is foolish cannot be determined by any bigoted persons like you who believe in an idiotic ideology. You may go on condemning the beef-eating Christians and other non-Hindus, and even be fanatically proud of your perverted thinking, but most of the modern Hindus in Britain, India and other countries are not idiotic like you and Dr. Ranjeet Singh to accept the disgusting ancient practices of drinking cow's urine and eating bullshit. The idiotic ideology of a few bigoted Brahmins is not acceptable to the modern Hindus.
 
    You want the Hindus in the UK to practise untouchability by avoiding to deal with the beef-eaters of Britain. Why don't you just go to the shop, office or restaurant of any Hindu businessman and ask him to prevent the beef-eating Britons from entering his business premises? He will give you a big tight slap on your face. The modern Hindus shall not accept your perverted ideology.
 
    After any Brahmin like you goes to the toilet and shits, he washes his arse with his hand, and later washes his hands with soap and water. People don't avoid shaking hands because they are used for washing the arses. They just have to wash their hands properly with soap and water after going to the toilet. Do you wash your arse while wearing disposable rubber gloves on your hands? In western countries, why do you use toilet seats that have been used by others?
 
    By the way, the use of soap and water to maintain hygiene is a practice which was started and propagated by the western countries. It is not a practice that was started by any bigoted Brahmins who pretend to be extremely clean.
 
    Can any Brahmin practise untouchability by asking a beef-eating doctor or a nurse not to touch him during medical treatment? Can the beef-eating patients be denied treatment by Brahmin doctors who want to practise untouchability while dealing with beef-eaters?
 
    Of course, there are bigoted Brahmins, practising untouchability, who won't shake hands with others even while wearing gloves.
 
    Why are you and Dr. Ranjeet Singh living in Britain if you don't want to deal with beef-eaters? Who is stopping you from leaving Britain where the majority of people are beef-eaters? Do you expect all the beef-eating Christian Britons to leave their own country because you consider them as dirty "Mlechhas" or outcastes?
 
    Don't you take goods in your hands when you buy them from beef-eaters who have touched such goods? Don't you handle currency notes and coins that have been touched by thousands of clean and unclean people including beef-eaters? Can you count currency notes while wearing gloves? Have you never read books used by other people before you? Can you turn the pages of any book while wearing gloves? Do you never touch the door-knobs, tables, chairs, benches, beds, cupboards, TVs, seats in buses, trains and theaters, etc., used and touched by thousands of others before you? Do you go everywhere wearing gloves?  
 
    While shaking hands, the gloves offer only limited protection mainly to the wearer. After shaking hands with just one person, the gloves become contaminated and are no protection to the next person who comes to shake hands with the wearer. How many times should a person change his gloves while shaking hands with a number of people? Once contaminated, the gloves offer no protection even to the wearer if he touches his face or any other part of his body with the gloved hands. Do all the people wear gloves while shaking hands with one another?
 
      Ashok  T.  Jaisinghani.
         Editor &  Publisher:
www.Top-Nut.com   Top Nutritionist 
www.Wonder-Cures.com   
www.SindhiKalakar.com 

________________________
 
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr Sharma
Sent: 22 May 2008 11:49 PM
Subject: RE: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?

Hari Om Ashok ji

 

Although the science of cross contamination and the spread of disease is a relatively modern concept in western countries, the Veda documents how disease proliferates through microbes. In order to avoid contracting life threatening diseases, some castes such as Brahmins, in order to maintain physical purity and remain functional, would shun physical contact not only with such persons engaged in 'polluting' work, but society as a whole. It is not surprising therefore given the climate of India and the risk of cross contamination through water borne diseases such as cholera, dysentery and typhoid that removal of any potential source (excrement, human corpses and animal carcasses etc.) was advocated. It is plausible that those associated with such unsociable but imperative tasks would be avoided by others and not interacted with socially. This has probably accounted for the current outdated practices of some members of the community not sharing food with such individuals or discouraging them from drawing water from the same well.  It is also interesting to note that the "safe distance" to keep away from such contaminated people would be the distance of a shadow cast by the average stature of a human being.

 

Not only can physical contact be contaminating, rather this also extends to the social sphere.  We should avoid the company of scoundrels, criminals and other deviants lest we become tainted by their hue.  Since time immemorial in the UK, there have always been a number of social groups, institutions, clubs, societies and lodges promoting common beliefs and values based on religious, geographical or ideological lines, correspondingly, Hindus wish to preserve their culture and exercise this freedom of choice. This may extend to who they wish to socialise with or whom they choose as a life partner.  Members of a UK vegetarian society for instance may consider the consumption of dead carcasses abhorrent and therefore shun the company of such perpetrators.

 

Many westerners are highly critical of this behaviour, however are quick to comment on such practices and ignore them in their own countries. There are now record levels of homeless people in the UK, who are analogous with the outcastes of Indian society. British menial workers seldom interact socially with those of the higher echelons and food and hygiene legislation strictly governs how food is handled, prepared and served to the public. Even in restaurants, chefs habitually wear disposable gloves when preparing food and more frequently, vendors handle fruit, vegetables and other produce, which are to be consumed with gloves. The discerning UK public would not tolerate anything less.

 

In the UK, schoolchildren are instructed from a young age on the merits of a strong ethical foundation avoiding the evils of promiscuity, drug addiction and crime.  From kindergarten, they are taught good hygienic practice of washing hands after using the lavatory and before partaking of a meal.  They are instructed in the art of oral hygiene and brush their teeth frequently throughout the day.  The cross contamination risks from bad hygienic practice are highlighted and the perils of ignoring them leading to the spread of disease emphasised.

 

Many of the British monarchy, aristocracy and gentry (English "upper castes") wear gloves when shaking hands with the public lest one of the commoners (untouchables) has just urinated without washing his hands.  Why do you not write to Queen Elizabeth II and accuse her of practising untouchability and while you are at it, you may question why her royal family enforce and exercise a rigid hereditary caste system.

 

I would now like you to consider the following:

 

Would you allow a surgeon to operate on you immediately after defecating, prior to cleansing the hands?

 

I ask you, would insert your finger in your own nose and then proceed to eat your food without cleansing your hands first?

 

Would you eat from a dirty plate next time you go out for a meal in a Pune restaurant?

 

You habitually snort up your own sputum from your nose and throat daily, which you swallow, however would you be prepared to drink a glass of snot expelled from someone else?

 

I would hope that all the answers would be in the negative and perhaps you now realise your own folly in trying to vilify practices advocated by our progenitors, to preserve a sound body and mind, avoiding disease.  

 

To this extent, I concur with Acharya Dr Ranjeet Singh ji and I highly recommend that we all adopt "untouchability" when interacting with others or face the dire consequences of 'unprotected' social dealings.  This extends to physical, social and philosophical interactions.

 

Please feel free to circulate this message to all asunder.

 

Raj Pandit

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Deeno Sharma [mailto:deenosharma5@yahoo.com]
Sent: 22 May 2008 17:14
To: b sharma; Ashok T. Jaisinghani
Cc: Deeno Sharma; ranjeet singh; Dr Prabhu Shastry (UK); Dr Raj Pandit Sharma; Nitin Mehta; psharma@rand.com; satish prakash; BBC (Radio); The Times - London; londonjohnny@hotmail.com; Teena Betts
Subject: RE: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?

 

I agree -  ASHOK

IS Brilliant. He has approached these matters with an insightful spirit. Forensic detail and with care for Dharma.

He has not been rude or discourteous.
Does not hid behind demands while presenting no factual info.
His research & presentation follows high detail
He is eager to reconcile findings for the benefit of a faith free of corrupt practices.
He lives in the Hell Hole of Pune and still has time to assist in the work of the Aryawarth (which is more than can be said for Most Hindus in the security of these Western Lands). This in itself should earn him accolade.

Bobji - your point 2 "No-one is talking to him because he is talking nonsense.." You must admit this is wrong.

No-one is talking to him because Hindus are Apathetic and they are Not Assertive. They don't give a damn. Esp when they're doing good. As the answer is apathy then Option One must therefore be in-force

Ashok
..You are a brilliant man with whom all is in total agreement.

Okay that was simply Litigant :)


From my humble point. Ashok Jaisinghani research always seeks to remove poor practices from this Faith that we All hold so dear.


Veda Shakti!

D Sharma
God Bless Berbice!




b sharma <bobstores@hotmail.com> wrote:

Hello Ashok

I am confident that Dr Ranjeetji is more than able to answer for himself and he does not need me to defend his position.

You, however, have discoursed the most on this discussion thread and you need to look within your self to answer the question of why everyone is generally ignoring you. 
As I see it, it can only be one of two things:
1  You are a brilliant man with whom all is in total agreement
2  You are talking nonsense basically and no-one wants to waste time encouraging you.
You decide.

I would not begin a discussion with anyone (including you) on the ghastly subject of untouchability unless both debating parties understand the foundation principles of Varnashram Dharma.  For me, the two concepts are completely intertwined . 
So please Ashok, tell us first about Varnashrma Dharma and then we can get into details.

As I see it, us Hindus love to fight each other and when the REAL enemy comes along; we are exhausted.  Then again who needs enemies; we do such a GOOD JOB OURSELVES.

Satish

From: ashokjai@sancharnet.in
To: bobstores@hotmail.com
CC: deenosharma5@yahoo.com; live_by_dharma@yahoo.co.uk; londonprabhu@yahoo.co.uk; drrsharma@o2.co.uk; animalahimsa@yahoo.co.uk; psharma@rand.com; satishprakash@yahoo.com; feedback@bbc.co.uk; letters@thetimes.co.uk
Subject: Re: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 11:33:43 +0530

Smart Satish Sharma,

 

    You have made a great discovery about my being dogmatic. You seem to know more about me than even I know about my own self.

 

    Dr. Ranjeet Singh who boasts of being a great religious scholar believes in untouchabililty, but he is not dogmatic for you. I pointed out his perverted belief, and you call me dogmatic. What sort of logic do you follow? You should go back to school to learn the correct meanings of words like dogma and dogmatic.

 

    Let me also know the reason why you are diverting the attention of others from my charge against Dr. Ranjeet Singh that he is propagating the belief in untouchability. His own statements clearly prove that he believes in untouchability. Whether he can have the courage to really practise untouchability in Britain is another matter.

 

      Ashok  T.  Jaisinghani.


____________________

 

----- Original Message -----

From: b sharma

Sent: 21 May 2008 3:00 AM

Subject: RE: Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?

 

Pragmatism and Common Sense Ashokji. 
Pragmatism and Common Sense.
I wonder if it is not YOU who are the dogmatic one.
Satish Sharma

 

Do Hindus practise Untouchability in Britain?

 

Hello Deeno,

 

    In the letter emailed to you, Dr. Ranjeet Singh has written:

 

    "Please note, not only the Mlechhas eat beef but whosoever partook it, he too becomes one. He too becomes a Mlechha."

 

    "Even the touch of such a person, as per our Dharma, is to be avoided. If inadvertantly touched, or one got touched, one needed to undergo shuddhi by taking a Sachaila snaanam: . . ."

 

    Travelling by bus or train with the beef-eating Christians and others in the United Kingdom, taking goods from beef-eaters and paying money to them can result in touching them. Can any Hindu be expected to take a purification bath every time after he gets touched by a beef-eating person who is considered as unclean by the dogmatists like Dr. Ranjeet Singh?

 

    If even the touch of a beef-eating "Mlechha" is to be avoided, why are fellows like Dr. Ranjeet Singh living in the UK, which is a country of beef-eaters? He cannot be telling us that the Hindus never shake hands with the beef-eating Christians of UK. Why don't the hypocrites like Dr. Ranjeet Singh leave the country of beef-eating "Mlechha" Christians?

 

    The views of dogmatic Hindus like Dr. Ranjeet Singh clearly smack of untouchability and the caste-like discrimination that are practised against the low-caste Dalits and outcastes in India. Do the other dogmatic Hindus like Dr. Ranjeet Singh have so much courage as to really practise untouchability in Britain? The dogmatic Hindus like him can be expelled from the UK for practising untouchability against the Christians and other non-Hindus living in Britain.

 

    How can the dogmatic Hindus treat the Christians as "Mlechhas" or outcastes in Britain, where the Christians are in a majority?  

 

      Ashok  T.  Jaisinghani.
         Editor &  Publisher:
  www.Top-Nut.com   Top Nutritionist
  www.Wonder-Cures.com  
  www.SindhiKalakar.com 


________________________

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Deeno Sharma

Sent: 20 May 2008 1:33 AM

Subject: The RV from Dr R Singh

 

Priya Acharya Pndt Singh

A good question you ask is. "  Rik Veda alone which established our religion and that all the other texts (including Yajuh, Saama and Atharva Veda as well) were 'ancillary and expanded theories of this faith'?"

The answer chronologically is that YES The RV did solely produce this the Faith of the Aryawarth.

Reasoning.
a) It is the First book.

b) It appeared 1st. Other theological data was not here or they would have been 1st. Whilst it the RV was solely in-force this religion of the Aryawarth was practised as per the RV. At these times there was no Rajsik, Tamsik, Sattvik etc. These were irrelevant to the Aryawarth.

The RV is a Pure form of this faith. In here there is No Hindu. In here is a Proud Aquisitoral faith. Unbridled. Unshackled. The Reading of the RV is a taste of energy.

Why even reading Vedic language one sees Pride, Nobility, Passion. It reels off puching the air: (Even now the west Clamours for the Word Aryan)

"Om Yaa Na Bando Bali Raja Dhaan a Bindra Maha Balam,...

"Om Shano Mitro, Shano Vadaa, Shano Waa She Shatay, Vasynaa Vikraynaam ...

"Om Agni Melee Purohitam Yagyas ya Dewa Mrit wa yam ...

Phonetically this is not the language of some people obsessed with protecting life, these people were concerned with acquisition. This (RV) is the Hard Rock of the Aryawarth. Uncompromising. In here you will not find vacilliation / conflicting terms. In here you will feel a long lost energy that seems to have waned from the moment we lost The Great Soma.

OK so this may seem very Right Wing etc etc. But just one more moment. I will demonstrate how Foreign Cultures seem to have crept into this Proud Faith.

? Wherein Have we Heard of the Land of Milk & Honey?

Ans - The Tora of the Jews
       - The Bible of the Christians

It in not in the RV

What do we serve at Puja.?
They call it Amrit!

Guess What - Take Some Milk add Honey and Kaboom you have Amrit. Milk & Honey.

Folks C'on you must see that only a return to the RV can cleanse this faith of the Intrusions and appendages.

There is more, eg. Prep for a Domestic Puja (Zorastrian), The Pig rejected as unclean (Moselm) etc. Back home we are a Proud Family from the Cow Country of Berbice we have a saying when such plagurism is in force "Monkey See Monkey Do" I would like in this incarnation to have eliminated such aspects so that our children can never have this levelled at them.

Only when you see the heart of the RV. Then will Vayu rise with you.

This Satsang is concluded.

Veda Shakti

Pndt Denaught Sharma
May 2008

PS - I am NOT Arya Samaj. I am Aryawarth!



ranjeet singh <live_by_dharma@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Mananeeya Shri Denought Sharmaji,

You wrote: "Mina ... From What Part of the Rik Veda have you gathered such data. Pls submit chapter and shloka."

The same question can be put to you, brother. And we ask: "From what part (chapter and 'shloka') of the Rik Veda have you gathered YOUR data on beef eating"?

Please note, not only the Mlechhas eat beef but whosoever partook it, he too becomes one. He too becomes a Mlechha. Here are its Scriptural corroborations:

Gomaans-khaadako yastu viruddham-bahubhaashate/

Sarvaachaar-viheenaashch mlechh ityabhidheeyate// Bodhaayanah.

Ghoraa-praanivaddha-preetaa duraatmaano gavaashinah/

Padma P 

Even the touch of such a person, as per our Dharma, is to be avoided. If inadvertantly touched, or one got touched, one needed to undergo shuddhi by taking a Sachaila snaanam:

Eshaam sparsh maatrena sachaailo jalam-aavishet. Jaa. Bha. P. 832.

Dvijah sprushtvaa na bhunjeeta; bhunjaano yadi sprushet/

Atah param na bhunjeeta tyakt-annam snaanam-aacharet//  Atri

And you eat it. Why? Under what Rik ordination?

You also wrote: "Pls remember the Rik Veda is what established this religion. So ancillary texts must simply be expanded theories of this faith."

Could we have your corroboration of the above: that it was Rik Veda alone which established our religion and that all the other texts (including Yajuh, Saama and Atharva Veda as well) were 'ancillary and expanded theories of this faith'? We would expect Scriptural, especially Rig Vedic corroborations and not self-devised verbal assertions (for you accept Rig Veda alone  as an authority).

With regards,

 

Dr. Ranjeet Singh.

 




--
Palash Biswas
Pl Read:
http://nandigramunited-banga.blogspot.com/
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)