Dumbing down of Hindu society (1) – ‘Mother of All (Open) Secrets’

There is this observation that commentaries on Hinduism as appear in this blog are based on quoting selectively about Hinduism.

This blog does, indeed, assiduously seek out selections of information – facts AND considered opinions (by scholars and others) – which tend to be studiously hidden, glossed over or downplayed in much of the popular discourse about Hinduism and its history. Keeping such historical facts and views ‘out of sight’ has the intended effect of keeping them ‘out of mind’ and, thereby, creating / sustaining a superficial, distorted or incorrect perception of important aspects of religion, history and society.

Why should we NOT try to figure out the true underlying causes of what even the respected historian Prof R C Majumdar has referred to as the “degeneration of Hindu society”?

Let us face up to the fact that the greatest damage to Hinduism has been inflicted from within, none more corrosive and toxic than the doctrine of Varnashramam as elaborated by the Manusmriti. It is said that a good measure of one’s character is the company one keeps. If so, let us get to know that Manu had such infamous admirers as Adolf Hitler and Friedrich Neitzche (Note 1).

The greatest threat to Hinduism comes NOT from the proselytizing religions (e.g. Christianity and Islam), but from those like the Sankaracharyas and other Hindutvawadis who are more concerned with the preservation of their religious orders / institutions and caste dominance than the effective regeneration of Hinduism by curing it of its single most debilitating affliction, viz. varnashramam. Nothing in India is more repulsive to modern standards of human rights and dignity than varna casteism.

It is always unsettling when one’s worldview or perception is challenged. But the response cannot be to close the mind to fresh information and insights. Without such additional or alternative viewpoints one cannot hope to account for an India that is marching into the 21st century as one of the most illiterate and malnourished nations of the world. The world’s largest democracy has a socio-economic order that disables and marginalizes a vast majority of its own people, i.e. nearly three quarters of its population (largely, the OBCs and Dalits). The ‘tryst with destiny’ (as Pandit Nehru proclaimed at the first midnight of independence in 1947) appears NOT to have been faithfully engaged for more than half a century after British rule. Why?

The answer is not to be found in what the brilliant sons and daughters of India were taught at the London School of Economics after World War II, a trendy nonsense that too many academics, political analysts, and think tankers have propagated for far too long (the latest being a former senior civil servant from Singapore). Instead, the answer is to be found first and foremost in the indifference and callousness towards the plight of the lesser ones that the age-old casteism of Brahmanical Hinduism, in particular its ‘karma-dharma’ logic, has bred in society.


The seed of Varnashramam in the Rig-Veda

The seed of varnashramam was already sown in Vedic times (a period of history that is said to have ended sometime between 800 BC and 500 BC), as evidenced by the Purushasukta of the Rig-Veda (the oldest of the Vedas). This is the hymn (X.90) of the Rig-Veda that alone enunciates the theory of the divine origin of varnas. It is the first mention in the Vedas of the story of the gods performing an anatomical division of Purusha (a cosmic or primeval being), and translated as follows:

“the Brahmana was his mouth; the Rajanya (later to be known as Kshatriya) was made his arms; the being (called) the Vaisya was his thighs; the Sudra sprang from his feet.”
- R C Majumdar’s Ancient India (8th edition), 1977

There is no mention of varna in the Rig-Veda prior to this hymn. Another Rig-Vedic hymn (IX.112) - believed to be of an earlier date than the Purushasukta – talks of members of the same family taking to different crafts and trades:

“A bard I am, my father a leech,
And my mother is a grinder of corn,
Diverse in means, but all wishing wealth,
Equally we strive for cattle.”

This suggests that the notion of hereditary occupations had not yet developed in society, and there was, therefore, freedom and mobility of labour (Majumdar).

In the early Vedic period the distinction was mainly between the fair-skinned Aryans and the dark-skinned natives (Dravidians) who were referred to, in derogatory terms, as Dasas in the Rig-Veda. It is only later, after the four-fold division of society was conceived (as in the Purushasukta), that the Dasas would be slotted into the varna of Sudras, an extremely degrading term.


The creation of Sanskrit as a language unintelligible to commoners

According to Majumdar, the major change (in Aryan society) that would act as a trigger to all subsequent societal changes was “the growing obscurity of the language of the hymns (the Vedic language)” (Note 2). Majumdar adds:

“The language of the old Vedic hymns was no longer understood by the common people, and a special training was required to master them. The consequences of this natural phenomenon were great and far-reaching. In the first place, need was felt of a class of men, who had special instruction in the old Vedic texts, and thus arose the professional Brahmana (Brahmin) class, destined to develop into a rigid caste at no distant date. Secondly, the Vedic hymns came to be regarded as the Canonical book, to which it was impossible to add, and the religion thus assumed a more or less stereotyped form……… We hear no more of those simple ceremonials of worship, breathing a sense of healthy and intimate relation between God and man. Instead, we find the energy of the priestly class directed to a number of ceremonies, which they developed in endless details, and to which they attached the most fanciful and mystic significance. Indeed the priestly class now devoted their whole attention to find out the hidden and mystic meaning of the rites and ceremonies. These ceremonies comprehend both domestic rites as well as great (fire) sacrifices, and form a body of rituals, probably the most stupendous and complex which has ever been elaborated by man.” (p. 78 - 79) (Note 3)

Majumdar also draws attention to a sacrifice called Vratya-Stoma which consisted of four rites, “by means of which persons outside the pale of Brahmanic fold were admitted into the orthodox society. The existence of this sacrifice conclusively proves that the Hindu society in old days was not so rigid as at present, and opened its doors to all persons.” (p. 83)

While elaborate rites, ceremonies, and ascetic practices (e.g. tapas or meditation accompanied by physical torture) had been taking the place of the simple religious worship of the good old times, an "intellectual section of the people" was inclining more and more towards believing that bliss and salvation were attainable only by true knowledge. Majumdar elaborates:

“They did not altogether discard rites, ceremonies, and austerities, but relegated them to a minor position, and laid down the doctrine, that 'he who knows God, attains to God, nay, he is God.’ Such philosophic speculation was of course no new thing, for its germs are traceable even in the RgVeda, and a distinction between Karma-kanda and Jnana-kanda, i.e. between rituals and knowledge, was always recognized in the Vedas. But it is only towards the close of the Vedic period, that these philosophic speculations were systematized and incorporated in the revealed literature, and thereby assumed an important position.

The general body of early philosophical treatises is known by the name of Upanishad. The number of Upanishads known to us is exceedingly large, about 200 in number, but many of them belong to very late times. The oldest Upanishads like the Brhadaranyaka and the Chhandogya, however, go back to a period anterior to 600 BC, and contain bold speculations about the eternal problems of human thought concerning God, man, and the universe. There was no doubt some sort of antagonism between the devotees of the ritual and the hilosophers, and it is not without significance that the Kshatriyas distinguished themselves in the domain of pure thought. The Brahmanas (Brahmins) were the sole authorities in questions affecting rites and ceremonies, but in philosophical speculations, they had rivals in the Kshatriyas, and sometimes even took lessons from them.

It is impossible to deal in detail with the philosophic speculations of the Upanishads, which are justly regarded as the most important contribution of India towards the world’s stock of spiritual thought. They give evidence of a rare intellectual attainment which has won the rapturous praise of the learned world.” (p. 84 – 85) (Note 4)

The emergence of the class of Brahmanas to interpret Sanskrit texts

An important development in Vedic society was the emergence of two leading classes, viz. the Brahmanas and the Kshatriyas, out of the general mass of population or commoners who came to be known as the Vaisyas (Note 5). According to Majumdar, it is only in the later Vedic period, when the growing obscurity of the language of the Vedic texts required a professional class of interpreters, that a definite class of Brahmanas (or Brahmins) arose. At the same time, a distinct Kshatriya class evolved in response to the growing importance of warriors as the Aryans spread eastwards across the northern stretches of the Indian subcontinent.

Even for the hymn of Purushasukta in the Rig-Veda, there was no rigid caste system as yet:

“There is nothing to show that none but the son of Brahmana could belong to that class. Many passages indicate that the knowledge of Vedic texts and religious ceremonies was looked upon as the primary qualification, and heredity counted for little, in the recognition of a person as Brahmana.…… There is enough evidence to show that the caste was not solely determined by the accident of birth, and the professions normally laid down for the different castes were never scrupulously followed in practice. As to the other essentials of caste, the prohibition of interdining among the different classes was not even thought of, and intermarriage between different classes was in vogue. The marriage of the three upper classes with the Sudras was indeed looked upon with disfavour, but it was not positively forbidden. Lastly, the Brahmanas had not yet attained an unquestioned position of supremacy, the Kshatriyas having successfully contested it for long.

The contrast between the ‘Arya’ and the ‘Sudra’, however, came to be more and more accentuated during the later part of the Vedic period. It was claimed that the Sudras had no right to approach the sacred fire, i.e. perform sacrifice, or to read the sacred texts, although many passages in early texts clearly admit these rights……. marriage with the Sudra gradually came to be looked upon with disfavour. These were portents of evil days (ahead) for the Sudras, but as yet there was no question of relegating them to a position of abject humiliation, such as has since been their fate.” (Majumdar, p. 88 – 89).

In the case of ‘Arya’ women, their general position changed for the worse (Note 6). “…. there are many references to women teachers,
possessing high spiritual knowledge. Even later literature refers to Brahmavadinis, a class of women who devoted their whole lives to study and spiritual meditation. All these offer a striking contrast to the later age, such as that represented by the Manu-samhita (or Manu-smriti) when a woman was forbidden to study Vedic literature.” (Majumdar, p. 91)

‘The Mother of All (Open) Secrets’

It is usual for an overwhelming majority of people to read only abridged / sanitized versions of the scriptures OR commentaries on the scriptures. It is relevant to mention here that until recent times, most Hindus (those referred to by such derogatory labels as ‘Sudras’ and ‘outcastes’) could not even do that because they could have read or heard the Vedas only at the risk of having molten lead poured into their ears! Sheer curiosity makes one wonder as to what treasure of knowledge and wisdom may have been so jealously guarded by the priests for more than two millennia!! We will find out definitively below.

On the other hand, there is no shortage of popular writings that contain heavy doses of fanciful (re-)interpretations or representations of what Hinduism is: by either glossing over some troubling aspects of the ancient texts that are wholly indefensible and offensive to modern sensibilities OR inventing convenient facts in the eagerness to ‘dress up the bride’. It may be argued that these are implicit rejections of objectionable parts of the ancient texts. If so, one should also be prepared to question / reject such other constructs of the texts OR claims about the texts as may be founded on OR (logically) developed from these same objectionable parts.

For instance, the claim of the Vedas being revealed canons (i.e. the claim that all of the hymns in the Vedas were revealed to man by the gods) should be abandoned when large tracts of, say, the Rig-Veda (the oldest and the most important of the Vedas) comprise hymns NOT dripping with divine love or selfless love for the divine (as in the bhakti literature of later years) NOR brimming over with rare knowledge and wisdom, BUT rather seething with contempt for AND invoking the vengeance of the vedic gods (e.g. Indra, Soma) against the natives (Dasas / Dasyus) who were valiantly resisting the Arya intruders into ancient India (see Osho below). It is to be noted that not all of these hymns are pointed against the natives of ancient India: some of these hymns are directed at other rival Arya tribes, seemingly engaged in territorial turf battles.

The malevolence of these Rig-Vedic hymns cannot escape notice. The hymns manifest the darkest of human thoughts and the meanest of human behaviours: opposing human tribes / communities are demonized, and the vedic gods are being tempted (through offerings of ‘food’) to visit the worst forms of destruction upon the ‘enemies’. There is nothing intellectually, morally or spiritually elevating about these hymns: they more appropriately belong to ‘hate literature’. This point finds no mention in popular discourse about the Vedas: it is understandably too embarrassing to talk about or admit.

Yet, there is no hesitation to mindlessly repeat that (all of) the Vedas (with no exclusions) are of divine origin and, therefore, infallible. This premise would then lend support to assertions that varnashramam as elaborated in the Manusmriti is divinely ordained. Such sophistry has to stop. Large sections of Indian society have suffered enough humiliation and disabilities under this parasitic varna-based social order over more than two thousand years.

Few do ever manage to read the entirety of ancient texts, even if available as translations in, say, English. Such reading of the original texts (good translations would suffice) will be to hear directly the actual ‘voice’ of the scriptures (assisted, of course, by glossaries, explanatory notes, and alternative commentaries / interpretations), instead of settling for or relying only on mere ‘voice-overs’, e.g. sermons, commentaries, etc. This also applies to the sacred texts of the ‘faiths of the book’, viz. Judaism, Christianity and Islam. To one who does so with his mental blinkers off, it will most likely be a revealing and unsettling experience. It is an exercise that would, of course, not only take up time, but also require great patience and diligence. But it is something that one should seriously consider doing at some point of time to realize the truth by and for oneself.

One of those who appear to have done such reading of the Vedas is Osho, who has spoken as follows:

“Your holy scriptures are dividing you, because every scripture demands that it be the only holy scripture. That necessarily creates conflict: Hindus cannot believe that The Bible is holy .... great competition. The Vedas are holy because they are the ancientmost scripture in the world; God himself wrote them. It is so stupid to talk this way.

I have talked with learned Hindu scholars and asked them, “Have you ever thought about your Vedas, which you claim that God has written? Just look at the content .... the very content shows that it cannot be written by God; there is an intrinsic impossibility.” And I was surprised – great scholars like Omkarnath Maharaj, who was thought to be the authority on the Vedas, were shocked by my question. He said, “I have never thought about it.”

I said, “You are the greatest authority. Open the Vedas anywhere, at any page. I don’t insist on a certain page – open it at random and read the content. The content will give you the proof that it cannot be written by God.”

He had a copy of Rigveda by his side. He opened it at random, and what was the content? He was so shocked. The content was: “A brahmin is praying to God...” Now, how can God write it? – “A brahmin is praying to God, saying, ‘I pray so much, but you don’t listen; there is a limitation to patience. This year you have proved it: just let your clouds rain on my fields, and not on the fields of my enemies.” This kind of rubbish is written by God? It is intrinsically an absolute proof that some stupid brahmin is writing it.”
- Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 104

“..... brahmins have lived like parasites on people – they don’t do
anything except religious rituals. Buddha was against all religious
rituals; he was against the Vedas, which are full of nonsense.”
- Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 66 (Note 7)

Osho is no ordinary soul. He has been described, for instance, by Mr V N Narayan (Chief editor, Hindustan Times) as “a fountain of wisdom that never goes dry”. He is without doubt one of 20th century’s most radical thinkers. And it is such a great mind that has called the Vedas as “full of nonsense”. It is a big letdown indeed. What the self-serving priesthood has been guarding so jealously for ages is NOT, after all, a treasure-trove of infallible knowledge and wisdom, but a load of “nonsense”, according to Osho who has spoken so emphatically and definitively (as above) on the matter! This must be the ‘Mother of All (Open) Secrets’ !!

Make no mistake. Osho was no less critical about some of the ways of other religions (Note 8).

Note 1:

OSHO, otherwise known as Bhagwan Rajneesh (one of 20th century’s most radical and prolific thinkers):

“There are great criminals, but Manu seems to top them all. Adolf Hitler was very respectful of Manu; Friedrich Neitsche was respectful of Manu – not of Gautam Buddha – and Manu has been a curse to this country. He has taken all humanity from millions of people, they are living like animals……

….. for five thousand years these people have been oppressed, exploited; their whole dignity as human beings has been destroyed – and they are one-fourth of the Hindu population. And they do the ugliest jobs; they should be respected, they should be honored for that. But on the contrary, even their shadow is untouchable. If the shadow of an untouchable falls on you, you have to take a bath immediately to purify yourself.”
- Priests and Politicians: The Mafia of the Soul (1999), p. 9 - 10

As also Wendy Doniger said in the Introduction to the The Laws of Manu (Penguin, 1991), Friedrich Neitzche sang Manu’s praises and used Manu as a stick with which to beat Christianity, which he characterized as ‘the victory of Chandala values, …. the undying Chandala revenge as the religion of love’. Neitzche’s extraordinary interpretation of Manusmrti :

“Here the proposed task is to breed no fewer than four races simultaneously: a priestly, a warrior, and a trading and farming race, and finally a menial race, the Sudras. Here we are manifestly no longer among animal-tamers: a species of human being a hundred times more gentle and rational is presupposed even to conceive the plan of such a breeding. One draws a breath of relief when coming out of the Christian sick-house and dungeon atmosphere into this healthier, higher, wider world. How paltry the ‘New Testament’ is compared with Manu, how ill it smells! But this organization too needed to be dreadful – this time in struggle not with the beast but with its antithesis, with the non-bred human being, the hotchpotch human being, the Chandala. And again it had no means of making him weak and harmless other than making him sick.”

Note 2:

Sanskrit is really an artificial language that was created to serve the purpose of a small self-serving group that was seeking to differentiate itself from the rest of the people. This would lead to a strong reaction many centuries later from Gautama Buddha who:

“introduced the practice of holding religious discourses in the language of the common people, in preference to the highly elaborate Sanskrit tongue, unintelligible to the people at large”. (Majumdar, p. 162).

Note 3:

Vedic Aryan ritual of fire sacrifices:

It was the duty of each householder to set up fire-places in his house to raise sacrificial fires. Offerings of grain, milk, honey, etc. were made into the sacrificial fires. There were also several kinds of sacrifices, e.g. Nirudhapasubandha, which entailed the killing of animals. In the Asvamedha yajna performed for the king, a horse was killed and its flesh roasted. In the case of the more dreadful Purushamedha ceremony, a human being was sacrificed instead of a horse. (Majumdar, p. 82 - 84)

The Vedic conception of a host of gods none of whom could claim to be superior to the other was quite distinct from the theism of Saivism and Vaishnavism that entailed the belief in a supreme deity, viz. Siva / Sakti or Vishnu. The elaborate fire sacrifices (of the Vedic religion) for propitiating gods and gaining favours of them, are in contrast to the personal worship of the images of the supreme deity of Siva or Vishnu in temples dedicated to Him (Majumdar, p. 431).

In contrast, the Dravidian / Tamilian worship involves offering flowers to the deities: hence, it is called ‘poosai’, which has entered Sanskrit and changed into ‘puja’.


Note 4:

“The Egyptians and the Indians were both faced with the common problem of death. ‘Had all ended for the man with the moment in which he had created to breathe?’ was their common enquiry, and to prevent such a horrible thing, their common endeavour. Yet the one found the true solution in the mighty Pyramids, containing the embalmed bodies, while the other was led to evolve the immortal Upanishads. This contrast is interesting and instructive, and not only indicates the true character of Indian civilization, but its superiority to all that preceded it.” (Majumdar, p. 85 – 86)

Note 5:

The Vaisyas, as the remaining Aryans now came to be called, found their position steadily deteriorating, though they were regarded as superior to the Sudras. A passage in Aitrareya Brahmana even goes so far as to say that a Vaisya “is to be lived on by another and to be oppressed at will”, indicating thereby their absolute dependence on the two upper classes. (Majumdar, p. 88)


Note 6:

“They (‘Arya’ women) lost the right to the Upanayana ceremony, and all their sacraments, excluding marriage, were performed without the recitation of Vedic mantras. ……… Polygamy certainly prevailed, and the following hymn in the Atharvaveda (V.17.8) clearly refers to polyandry and inter-marriage:

Even though there were non-Brahmana
previous husbands of a woman,
The Brahmana alone becomes her husband
If he seizes her hand.

Theoretically the wife was still accorded a very high position. Thus the Satapatha Brahmana (V.2.1.10) says that she is half her husband and completes him. But there are unerring signs that her status and dignity were lowered a great deal during this period. Thus many of the religious ceremonies, formerly left to the wife, were now performed by priests. She was not allowed to attend the political assemblies. A submissive wife who would keep her mouth shut and dine after her husband is now held up as the ideal. The birth of daughter was most unwelcome; for she was regarded as a source of misery and a son alone was the saviour of the family.” (Majumdar, p. 89 – 90)


Note 7: (to be filled)


Note 8:

“Religion has done so much against humanity, with good intentions. Those people were not functioning with bad intentions, but they were certainly idiots, not knowing exactly what they were doing, and how human psychology functions. They exploited man.......

The temporal power protects the priest, the priest protects the temporal power..... For example, poverty: all the religions teach, ‘Blessed are the poor.’ It is not only Jesus. Jesus says it very accurately, fully, in one sentence, in one maxim: ‘Blessed are the poor for they shall inherit the kingdom of God.’ But this is the teaching of all the religions: you should accept your poverty as a blessing, as a God-given gift. This is just a test of your faith. If you can pass through this fire test of poverty without grumbling, without in any way thinking that this is unjust, if you can go through it as a God-given gift, then the kingdom of God is yours.

It is a great consolation to Lazarus, when Jesus says to him ..... It happened: Lazarus was very poor; and the richest man in the village was giving a feast on his birthday. Lazarus was hungry, thirsty, and passing through that village he asked for some water. The servants threw him out. They said, ‘Don’t you see that our master is giving a feast and great guests have gathered? You are just a beggar! – you have some nerve to enter the house and ask for water. Go to hell! Go away from here as quickly as possible.

Jesus says to Lazarus: ‘Don’t be worried. You will see: in paradise, you will be enjoying all the pleasures and this man will be suffering in hell-fire, thirsty, and will ask, ‘Lazarus, give me some water.’ Great consolation! – but a great strategy to protect the rich from the poor. The rich are few, the poor are many. Once they get the idea that it s not a blessing but a curse, they will kill all these rich people. It is good both ways: a consolation for the poor, so that poverty is a blessing and a protection for the rich, so that the rich cannot revolt.

Religions have been the reason poverty goes on existing in the world; otherwise there is no reason at all for it, particularly now, when science and technology can transform this whole earth into paradise.

The religious people would not like this earth to be turned into paradise, because then what would happen to their paradise? They would love the earth to remain as poor, as starved, as hungry and as sick as it is, because upon this their whole business depends. The rich donate to the churches because the church protects them. The poor donate, who have not even enough to eat. They donate to the churches because it is the church who gives them guidance. And this life is small, this life is not much; much of it has passed, a little is left – that too will pass. Then there is eternal life, of eternal joys. The church shows the way, Jesus shows the way.”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 17 - 21

“.... the Catholic church .... is the most organized religion in the world, and the greatest in numbers .... It has burned thousands of women alive, by fictitiously labeling them as witches..... because they were carrying the older and more ancient tradition of the days when the
world was pagan. They were nature worshippers, and for Catholicism that is the worst crime – because that means there is no need of a God, nature is enough. There is no need of a Jesus Christ as a savior, because nobody is drowning. And there is no need for the Catholic priests and confessionals, because nature knows nothing as sin. These women were burned alive because they were pagans......

The church’s power has remained, although its secular power has shrunk to eight square miles in the Vatican. But it is still a kingdom – an independent nation, and the pope is also the head of a state.

Right now the manager of the Vatican’s bank is in hiding, because the Italian government has an arrest warrant against him. But they cannot enter the Vatican. It is an independent country……

Millions of people have been killed in the name of religion and God in the crusades, jihads and other religious wars......

Just a few days ago the pope declared that the church should not take part in any kind of politics; that Christian priests, monks, bishops, and
cardinals should remain beyond politics. And while he was saying all this, he was sending millions of dollars to a political party in Poland to fight against communism. These people have so many faces! If you are not to take part in politics, then why should you be interested in the communist party not remaining in power in Poland? .....

But this is not new. This has been going on since the crucifixion of Jesus. If that poor carpenter’s son had known that this is what was going to be the ultimate result of his teachings, Jews would not have been needed to crucify him; he would have committed suicide himself!”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 63 - 65

“..... every prophet, every messiah, every avatara, every tirthankara is
claiming that only he is the right one..... Jesus goes on declaring that he is the only son of God. Naturally, he cannot accept Gautama Buddha or Confucius or Lao Tzu or Basho or Bodhidharma – not even as cousins. ....

Six hundred years after Jesus, Mohammed established a new religion – because the Arabs had no religion of their own. They were a nomadic race, wanderers; they had no organized religion. Mohammed collected those Arabs under the name of Mohammedanism. He himself was an Arab, and naturally had great influence. For his whole life he was fighting – war and war, not a single day of rest – and on his sword was his message: “My message is peace.” It was written on his sword!

....... If peace is your message.... and certainly he believed that peace was his message, but it had to follow his conditions: if the whole world becomes Mohammedan there will be peace. But how is it possible? He has named his religion.... Mohammedanism is not the name given by him to his religion; the name that he has given is Islam, and Islam simply means peace. A strange kind of peace! – the prophet of peace fought his whole life .....

...... Jews are one of the races which have suffered most. Of course, they have their part and their contribution in their suffering. They have suffered most because they were the first to claim, “We are the chosen people of God, and it is our basic right to rule over the world. Other human beings are inferior human beings.”
- Osho, Religiousness Not Religion, 2000, p. 105 - 107

“Mohammedans burnt one of the greatest treasures of the world, the library of Alexandria. The library was the greatest in the ancient world. The fire continued for almost six months, the library was so big. It took six months for it to be burnt down completely. And the man who burnt it was a Mohammedan, Calipha………. He came with a Koran in one hand and with a burning torch in the other, and he asked the librarian, ‘I have a simple question. In this big library, millions of books are there…..’

Those books contained all that humanity had learned up to that time, and it was really more than we know now. That library contained every information about Lemuria, Atlantis, and all the scriptures of Atlantis, the continent that disappeared into the Atlantic. It was the ancient-most library, a great preserve. Had it still been, humanity would have been totally different – because we are rediscovering many things which had already been discovered.

This Calipha said, ‘If this library contains only that which is contained in the Koran, then it is not needed; it is superfluous. If it contains more than is contained in the Koran, then it is wrong. Then it has to be destroyed immediately. Either way it has to be destroyed immediately. Why manage such a big library unnecessarily? The Koran is enough. And if you say that it contains many more things than the Koran, then those things are bound to be wrong, because the Koran is the truth.’

Holding the Koran in one hand, he started the fire with the other hand – in the name of the Koran. Mohammed must have cried and wept in heaven, because in his name, the library was being burnt…..”
- Osho, Bauls: The Dancing Mystics (1999), p.110 - 111

The posts to come in this series:

Dumbing down of Hindu society (2) – ‘Manu-doom’

Dumbing down of Hindu society (3) – Work Ethics

and more……

Comments may be forwarded to: anbarul@yahoo.com