creation of human kind

Bijoy Misra bmisra at FAS.HARVARD.EDU
Wed Dec 23 18:25:45 UTC 1998

May I again request both Mr. Chandra and
Mr. Banerjee to refrain from RSS and
counter-RSS exchanges.  This discussion
seems highly biased..

Let there be peace in the holidays!

Bijoy Misra

On Wed, 23 Dec 1998, Ashish Chandra wrote:

> Partha Banerjee wrote :
> The theories of evolution have much fewer questions unanswered than the
> "theories" of creation do. And unlike creationists, evolutionists do not
> pretend that they have all the answers.
> The creationist theory on the other hand is only a myth, but pro-creation
> philosophers (mostly status quo politicians and the religious right) clothe
> it in a quasi-scientific garb.
> "Creationists for the most part are fundamentalist Christians (make it
> fundamentalists - PB) whose central premise is a literal interpretation of
> the Bible (make it Puranas or the Quran - PB) and a belief in its
> inerrancy. In adopting a literal interpretation of the Bible, they differ
> from nearly all other Christians and Jews (make it other Hindus or Muslims
> - PB).  Scientists, many of whom are religious, have no wish to deny
> fundamentalists their own beliefs, but the creationists are determined to
> impose their views on others. In particular, they are lobbying to have
> science classes teach the ideas of: a sudden creation from nothing by God;
> a worldwide flood; a young Earth; and the separate ancestry of humans and
> apes.[...] And because they depend on supernatural intervention, not
> natural law, they are also unscientific. There is no scientific evidence,
> or even an appeal from common sense or experience, to suport the
> creatinists' claims." [From Tim M. Berra, Evolutoin and the Myth of
> Creationism. Stanford University Press, 1990]
> Creationists also take advantage of the reluctance of the scientific
> community to get into raucous political fights. That's how Christian
> Council has become so powerful in USA, a country that has thousands of
> extremely intelligent scientists. The same logic could be applied to the
> situation in India or say, Pakistan or Iran.
> ___
> Dear Sri Banerjee,
> I suggest that you provide some proof in support of your statements that
> Hinduism supports the creation theory or the so-called Hindu right supports
> the creation theory. Hinduism (I mean all the religions in Hinduism)
> support the belief that there is no creation. There is a projection and
> then there is contraction (destruction) and this is a never ending process.
> I suggest you might want to read the Nasadiya Sukta of RgVeda. Alternately,
> you might read some works of Hindu philosophers (from any of the six
> Darshanas) and their ideas about the Jagat (universe). Swami Vivekananda is
> one. There are many.
> Without having any basis for saying whatever it is you have said, you
> demonstrate a desire to drag the Hindu right into anything that is
> controversial and, sometimes, abhorrent. Please try and be a little more
> focused in your criticism. I have read nearly all your postings and never
> have you desisted from criticizing the RSS and BJP whether or not they are
> related to the topic or not. I don't think the fact that you spent 15 years
> with the RSS holds much water in light of the theme of criticism that you
> have chosen to adopt. It does not automatically make you an authority on
> what RSS stands for and what it doesn't.
> Ashish

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list