name of our religion. We base this upon the 1830 Trust Deed text which
forbids "oblations" and offerings to be collected within.
The Ananusthanics on the other hand are charlatans soliciting funds at
every stage. There can be no better example than this of "Pandit"
Sitanath Tattwabhushan who in 1880 was one of the 8 Brahmos of Sylhet
who issued the provlamation denouncing Keshab Sen and Navabidhan. (see
Sivnath Sastri's History of the Brahmo Samaj"). Tattwabhushan (whose
real name was Sitanath Dutta) then tried to insert a pseudo-Brahmanism
into the Sadharan Brahmo Samaj by publishing in 1921 his "Manual of
Brahmic prayer and devotions" which exhorts the Sadharan adherents at
every stage to "donate" to the Brahmo Samaj. Got married ? - donate,
Recovered from illness ? - donate, Setting up a new Samaj ? - donate.
Although Tattwabhushan (Dutta) claimed to have compiled his devotional
manual from 4 sources - 2 Hindu podhattis, the Adi Samaj Anusthan
Paddati and the Navabidhan 'New Samhita', we find that such out and
out commercial practices are only in the Navabidhan Samhita followed
by one faction of Sadharan Samaj.
Dutta's manual was roundly denounced in 1921 when it was first
published and no sensible person would rely on it today except as an
All right thinking Brahmos should be careful of these Dutta's in
Brahmoism, ie Sitanath (Tattwabhushan) Dutta, Narendra (Vivekanand)
Dutta etc and their descendants who have always been counted amongst
the enemies of True Brahmoism for trying to commercialise Brahmoism
into a Ramakrishna "Mission" model at every step.
On 3/31/09, sroy1947 wrote:
> "Peddling" ??? This raises an interesting issue - "Does Brahmoism permit
> donations to be collected within Samaj premises?"
> "and that no sacrifice, offering or oblation of any kind or thing, shall
> ever be permitted therein;"
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Rahul Dev Sharma
> <rahul.dvsharma@...> wrote:
>> Brahmoism is a religious system, Brahmo Samajes are societies which
>> peddle a diluted (universally palatable) version of True Brahmoism.
>> What is peddled at Brahmo Samajes is more often than not unacceptable
>> to Brahmos.
>> I think you are confusing nationalism with patriotism.
>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 5:23 PM, biswajit dutta
>> <bis_dutta2000@...> wrote:
>> > It appears that you make an artificial distinction between Brahmo Samaj
>> > &
>> > Brahmoism . I am afraid your views may not resonate with the majority
>> > for
>> > whom :-
>> > a)Brahmo Samaj & Brahmoism are not at cross purposes .
>> > b)The terms "universalism" & "nationalism" may not be mutually exclusive
>> > .
>> > That I have a tolerant/open/rational mind willing to imbibe global best
>> > practices does not mean I am anti-national or less nationalistic . On
>> > the
>> > contrary , universalism can lead to improved nationalism .
>> > c)By distillation of essence(accepting only what is suitable/relevant)
>> > from
>> > other religions Brahmoism has become a better religion . There is no
>> > harm in
>> > assimilating the good or the great from others .
>> > d)Sivanath Sastri's interpretation of Brahmo history finds wide
>> > acceptablity
>> > with most Brahmos .
>> > e)I don't know by what yardstick , Sadharan Samajis can be regarded to
>> > be
>> > the basest of Brahmos ? This appears to be too sweeping a statement .
>> > Biswajit Dutta
>> > --- On Sat, 14/3/09, Rahul Dev Sharma <rahul.dvsharma@...> wrote:
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: