​

Namaste everyone,

For some days i was thinking there are many country based subs of múslims and other communities but we don't have any although we have the main Hinduism sub but people don't usually talk about ground reality, attacks on temples there. If something occurs i post it on this sub. But it's hard to post everything as I'm not always online. For these reasons, i thought i'd create a sub community (based on country or specific area, like Bengal/ Bangladesh as I'm from Bangladesh). But BangladeshiHindus but the name's taken, BangaliHindus is also taken. Then i thought why don't i try to connect hindus of both bengal. These topics would be discussed more in there and i hope that helps in some way.

That's why i created this sub r/BanglaHinduForum. So that we can discuss ongoing matters regularly and also discuss on Dharma, History and other things.

I am a noob so it'll be hard to promote and maintain the sub. That's why I'm posting here so that i can connect both parts of bengal. I need people with me who are experienced in moderating as i don't know about anything.

Thanks

A common thing from my experience is how much people put their trust in so called scholars who are mostly foreigners or colonials, liberal/secular hindus who havent studied from a formal rigorous guru shishya parampara.

Now am all for historical significance as it can legitimately show good things about our religion and progression but we need to understand that our scriptures determine and should validate history than vice versa.

The common consensus on jesus is that he likely existed but not a divine figure and some tales of him are fabricated and several miracles are inspired by previous folk tales or pagan god stories.

But you don't see a christian saying that they believe jesus existed as a normal joe who got divinized. No, they utmost stick to their beliefs and I think, many "secular liberal" hindus should also learn this from them.

You will actually see hindus saying how they believe krishna/rama existed as a real kings who got exaggerated later. Now, on isolation, there's nothing wrong and its perhaps a strong charitable interpretation FROM A HISTORICAL STANDPOINT.

There's a big difference between tradition and historical methodology.

You know vedas? If you are a hindu, Vedas are Apaurusheyatva. Forever eternal and devoid of any sort of "interpolations". You know how historians and so called scholars date vedas? They start with the premise that Vedas are man made and this is FUNDAMENTALLY incompatible with hinduism. You cant accept that Vedas are forever eternal AND also believe in historians POV at the same time.

There's also some more points about how something like Purusha suktam could be a later forgery and if you argue that vedas is "interpolated", this is severely detrimental to Hinduism. You cant sit on both boats.

Another is Puranas and genuinely, Puranas are too much disrespected here with interpolation arguments. Now interpolation is complex given both traditional sampradayas also argue certain parts were interpolated BUT THEIR REASONING IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT. I will give you one example--- Madhvacharya quotes several verses that are not found in the present manuscript and hence, tattvavaadis argue the manuscripts were lost. This requires prior belief in Madhvacharya but it is fundamentally different from how hisorians argue about interpolations.

Check about HH Wilson preface in Vishnu Purana translation. He says that they can date how old the purana is with the kings they mention etc. So, lets say Bhagavatam mention mauryan empire, so it must be post mauryan text. This approach is flawed because Puranas contain wide range of topics and Veda Vyasa, an avatara is said to be seer of past present and future. How can you reconcile both simultaneously? Answer is You really can't. Unless, your interpolation argument has a geniune sampradaya backing, it could work but if its driven solely by what historians and so called scholars think, You can't be a hindu.

So, yea, I genuinely plead to stop treating our own scriptures from historian perspective, how X purana is fabricated and a medieval creation or how Purusha suktam was added later to add casteism element in vedas etc...

YOUR SCRIPTURES SHOULD VALIDATE HISTORY. NOT VICE VERSA.

The ACHARYAS OF YOUR RELIGION SHOULD VALIDATE HISTORIANS NOT VICE VERSA.