A RESPONSE I LOVED TO GIVE TO DEAR FRIEND, HEMENDRAKUMAR MANDAL, FOR HIS DELIGHTFUL OBSERVATION BY WAY OF COMMENT TO A POST OF MINE
Sugata Bose : Is Sri Ramakrishna God?
Hemendrakumar Mandal : Sat kando ramayaner por sita ramer ma?
Sugata Bose : Is it sarcasm? Then it is ill-intended and ill-directed, too. It were better if you contributed your considerable knowledge of this specific Ramayana that you mention, its story-line, the delineation of its characters and the narrative's eventual destiny, to this discourse for all to benefit from instead of this one-liner that carries scant weight beyond it being an oft-quoted statement for a fruitless exercise in levity, here presented by way of partaking in derisive delight, perchance, if I have read right the intent and if I have not over-read into its meaning.
Anyhow, to set matters straight, let me satisfy you, if I may, that is, and if I can, that is, as to why these sorts of questions are pertinent. They set people rethinking about prior conclusions, inferences arrived at earlier and settled judgements that have almost become fossilised. Such reexamination of theories are the standard mode of scientific thinking and investigation and one sees no reason as to why such a stupendous subject as the science of spirituality should be excluded from this mode of scientific enquiry on a continuous basis for theory to get re-validation or rejection, as the case may be, over the passage of time. Such continuous questioning, even though to the devout it may seem to be an exercise in absurdity and in utter foolishness, is really the hallmark of human civilisation where rational enquiry has been the basis for the discovery of all empirical knowledge and the basis for philosophical ratiocination as well. Spirituality and its dogmatic or devout declarations, if they are left outside of the purview of persistent questioning by way of the attempted examination of all its aspects, attitudes and assertions, will degenerate into a semblance of the fanatic's creed which is wholly unwholesome. Hence, this sort of periodic examination of an almost settled fact for devotees, an utterly absurd proposition for most rationalists, agnostics, atheists and anti-theists, and a worthwhile subject for debate and discussion on a renewed basis for those who look to refreshing the intellectual discourse about contentious human beliefs and convictions, assumes signal significance. And it is in this light, dear noble friend, Hemendrakumar Mandal Mahashay, that this question thrown to the readers by this writer must be seen and duly responded to if the will be there, if the exercise is not considered still a waste of time and effort and if the inspiration to share one's knowledge with others be copiously present in the concerned individual.
Thanking you for holding patience with this writer in belaboured boredom,
I remain ever yours in Sitaram, of your choice at that, though not in the marvellous maternal sense of the former with respect to the latter as suggested by your highness with reference to the old adage but in loving conjugal divine kinship of the delightful duo,
Sugata Bose.
Sugata Bose : Is Sri Ramakrishna God?
Hemendrakumar Mandal : Sat kando ramayaner por sita ramer ma?
Sugata Bose : Is it sarcasm? Then it is ill-intended and ill-directed, too. It were better if you contributed your considerable knowledge of this specific Ramayana that you mention, its story-line, the delineation of its characters and the narrative's eventual destiny, to this discourse for all to benefit from instead of this one-liner that carries scant weight beyond it being an oft-quoted statement for a fruitless exercise in levity, here presented by way of partaking in derisive delight, perchance, if I have read right the intent and if I have not over-read into its meaning.
Anyhow, to set matters straight, let me satisfy you, if I may, that is, and if I can, that is, as to why these sorts of questions are pertinent. They set people rethinking about prior conclusions, inferences arrived at earlier and settled judgements that have almost become fossilised. Such reexamination of theories are the standard mode of scientific thinking and investigation and one sees no reason as to why such a stupendous subject as the science of spirituality should be excluded from this mode of scientific enquiry on a continuous basis for theory to get re-validation or rejection, as the case may be, over the passage of time. Such continuous questioning, even though to the devout it may seem to be an exercise in absurdity and in utter foolishness, is really the hallmark of human civilisation where rational enquiry has been the basis for the discovery of all empirical knowledge and the basis for philosophical ratiocination as well. Spirituality and its dogmatic or devout declarations, if they are left outside of the purview of persistent questioning by way of the attempted examination of all its aspects, attitudes and assertions, will degenerate into a semblance of the fanatic's creed which is wholly unwholesome. Hence, this sort of periodic examination of an almost settled fact for devotees, an utterly absurd proposition for most rationalists, agnostics, atheists and anti-theists, and a worthwhile subject for debate and discussion on a renewed basis for those who look to refreshing the intellectual discourse about contentious human beliefs and convictions, assumes signal significance. And it is in this light, dear noble friend, Hemendrakumar Mandal Mahashay, that this question thrown to the readers by this writer must be seen and duly responded to if the will be there, if the exercise is not considered still a waste of time and effort and if the inspiration to share one's knowledge with others be copiously present in the concerned individual.
Thanking you for holding patience with this writer in belaboured boredom,
I remain ever yours in Sitaram, of your choice at that, though not in the marvellous maternal sense of the former with respect to the latter as suggested by your highness with reference to the old adage but in loving conjugal divine kinship of the delightful duo,
Sugata Bose.
No comments:
Post a Comment