Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions

[santosh lavakare]

Dear Sir

Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.

Best wishes
santosh


Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
fundamental issues :-

a)Lack of leadership .

b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
. Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .

Regards,
Biswajit Dutta

On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
<debanjan.ray@...> wrote:

    Dear Surajit uncle,

    I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
of us.

    What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
the book, Dawkins has mentioned:

    “Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name.”

    Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
after generations in the survival machines like us.

    So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
perhaps not; that’s it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
natural genetic propagation. That’s why Brahmoism overall is dying
down.

    With best regards,
    Debanjan Ray


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconferenceorg/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconferenceorg/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:brahmoconferenceorg-digest@...
    mailto:brahmoconferenceorg-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    brahmoconferenceorg-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Saurav Brahmogroups]

Dear Mr Santosh,

Mr Biswajit Datta and other psuedoBrahmo apologists are confused about
Brahmoism. True Brahmos on other hand are very clear about Brahmoism
and Brahma Dharma.

For example,

1 - Brahmoism is the highest form of Hinduism
2 - What passes for Hinduism today is a debased and perverted religion
3 - Brahmoism does not need "leadership" or leaders.
4 - Brahmos worship and adore One God - not leaders.
5 - Brahmoism needs no marketing. The world beats its own path to the
maker of a better rat trap.

What is sorely lacking today is the wider dissemination of information
about True Brahmoism and the crucial period of our history between
1865 and 1925.

Saurav
In Truth

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., santosh lavakare
<santoshlavakare@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Sir
>
> Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.
>
> Best wishes
> santosh
>
>
> Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
> Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
> religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
> acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
> religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
> discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
> fundamental issues :-
>
> a)Lack of leadership .
>
> b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
> primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
> subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
> dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
> similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
> where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
> positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
> brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
> . Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
> ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
> Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .
>
> Regards,
> Biswajit Dutta
>
> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
> <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
>
>     Dear Surajit uncle,
>
>     I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
> environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
> of us.
>
>     What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
> Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
> Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
> natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
> childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
> the book, Dawkins has mentioned:
>
>     “Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
> more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
> by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
> permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name.”
>
>     Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
> after generations in the survival machines like us.
>
>     So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
> perhaps not; that’s it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
> education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
> same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
> natural genetic propagation. That’s why Brahmoism overall is dying
> down.
>
>     With best regards,
>     Debanjan Ray
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconferenceorg/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconferenceorg/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:brahmoconferenceorg-digest@...
    mailto:brahmoconferenceorg-fullfeatured@...

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    brahmoconferenceorg-unsubscribe@...

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Malay Sanyal]

Dear Saurav and friends

There is a great deal being discussed on that other Yahoo "Brahmo" group
which we cannot agree with. I dont think we should dignify their nonsense
with our comments or educate them about Brahmo dharm either.

In this message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconference/message/738

their moderator Debajan Ray quotes Richard Dawkins with approval

"Genes do indirectly control the manufacture of bodies, and the influence is
strictly one way: acquired characteristics are not inherited. No matter how
much knowledge and wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will be
passed on to your children by genetic means. Each new generation starts from
scratch. A body is the genes' way of preserving the genes unaltered.”

This flies in the face of True Brahmoism's second precept which upholds
transmission of information from one generation to the next by both genetic
and memetic techniques and upon which the caste and religious structure of
Brahmoism is based.

Malay Sanyal
President,
Brahmo Conference Organisation

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...>
wrote:

>
> Dear Mr Santosh,
>
> Mr Biswajit Datta and other psuedoBrahmo apologists are confused about
> Brahmoism. True Brahmos on other hand are very clear about Brahmoism
> and Brahma Dharma.
>
> For example,
>
> 1 - Brahmoism is the highest form of Hinduism
> 2 - What passes for Hinduism today is a debased and perverted religion
> 3 - Brahmoism does not need "leadership" or leaders.
> 4 - Brahmos worship and adore One God - not leaders.
> 5 - Brahmoism needs no marketing. The world beats its own path to the
> maker of a better rat trap.
>
> What is sorely lacking today is the wider dissemination of information
> about True Brahmoism and the crucial period of our history between
> 1865 and 1925.
>
> Saurav
> In Truth
>
> --- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., santosh lavakare
> <santoshlavakare@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sir
> >
> > Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > santosh
> >
> >
> > Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
> > Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
> > religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
> > acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
> > religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
> > discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
> > fundamental issues :-
> >
> > a)Lack of leadership .
> >
> > b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
> > primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
> > subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
> > dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
> > similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
> > where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
> > positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
> > brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
> > . Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
> > ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
> > Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .
> >
> > Regards,
> > Biswajit Dutta
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
> > <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
> >
> >     Dear Surajit uncle,
> >
> >     I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
> > environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
> > of us.
> >
> >     What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
> > Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
> > Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
> > natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
> > childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
> > the book, Dawkins has mentioned:
> >
> >     “Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
> > more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
> > by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
> > permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name.”
> >
> >     Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
> > after generations in the survival machines like us.
> >
> >     So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
> > perhaps not; that’s it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
> > education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
> > same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
> > natural genetic propagation. That’s why Brahmoism overall is dying
> > down.
> >
> >     With best regards,
> >     Debanjan Ray
> >
>

[Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL]

Dear Mr. Malay Sanyal,

I love debate. I understand that you perhaps did not like quotes from Richard Dawkins. But, the statement is a scientific truth. It is a property of genes.
I agree with you that Brahmoism is transmitted from one generation to the next. But, it is through culture, heritage and education.  Religion is propagated through education only. When a child is born, (s)he knows nothing about religion. (s)he has to be taught. Brahmoism is not natural characteristics. We can test it through our own children. It is our duty to propagate Brahmoism in the next generation.


With best regards,
Debanjan Ray
________________________________
From: brahmoconferenceorg@... [mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...] On Behalf Of Malay Sanyal
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 2:37 PM
To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions


Dear Saurav and friends

There is a great deal being discussed on that other Yahoo "Brahmo" group which we cannot agree with. I dont think we should dignify their nonsense with our comments or educate them about Brahmo dharm either.

In this message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconference/message/738

their moderator Debajan Ray quotes Richard Dawkins with approval

"Genes do indirectly control the manufacture of bodies, and the influence is strictly one way: acquired characteristics are not inherited. No matter how much knowledge and wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will be passed on to your children by genetic means. Each new generation starts from scratch. A body is the genes' way of preserving the genes unaltered."

This flies in the face of True Brahmoism's second precept which upholds transmission of information from one generation to the next by both genetic and memetic techniques and upon which the caste and religious structure of Brahmoism is based.

Malay Sanyal
President,
Brahmo Conference Organisation

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>, Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Mr Santosh,
>
> Mr Biswajit Datta and other psuedoBrahmo apologists are confused about
> Brahmoism. True Brahmos on other hand are very clear about Brahmoism
> and Brahma Dharma.
>
> For example,
>
> 1 - Brahmoism is the highest form of Hinduism
> 2 - What passes for Hinduism today is a debased and perverted religion
> 3 - Brahmoism does not need "leadership" or leaders.
> 4 - Brahmos worship and adore One God - not leaders.
> 5 - Brahmoism needs no marketing. The world beats its own path to the
> maker of a better rat trap.
>
> What is sorely lacking today is the wider dissemination of information
> about True Brahmoism and the crucial period of our history between
> 1865 and 1925.
>
> Saurav
> In Truth
>
> --- In brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>, santosh lavakare
> <santoshlavakare@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Sir
> >
> > Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.
> >
> > Best wishes
> > santosh
> >
> >
> > Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
> > Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
> > religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
> > acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
> > religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
> > discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
> > fundamental issues :-
> >
> > a)Lack of leadership .
> >
> > b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
> > primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
> > subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
> > dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
> > similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
> > where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
> > positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
> > brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
> > . Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
> > ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
> > Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .
> >
> > Regards,
> > Biswajit Dutta
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
> > <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
> >
> >     Dear Surajit uncle,
> >
> >     I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
> > environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
> > of us.
> >
> >     What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
> > Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
> > Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
> > natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
> > childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
> > the book, Dawkins has mentioned:
> >
> >     "Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
> > more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
> > by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
> > permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name."
> >
> >     Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
> > after generations in the survival machines like us.
> >
> >     So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
> > perhaps not; that's it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
> > education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
> > same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
> > natural genetic propagation. That's why Brahmoism overall is dying
> > down.
> >
> >     With best regards,
> >     Debanjan Ray
> >
>

________________________________
Important notice: This e-mail and any attachment there to contains corporate proprietary information. If you have received it by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system.
Thank You.

[Malay Sanyal]

Dear Mr Ray

Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically
validated. It is also incorrect.

Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways.
Genetically or memetically.

The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc
pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath (founder of
modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome
in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also
split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go
underground.

Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient
religions) include

1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was
experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within
us
4) Godhood of father.

Dr. Malay Sanyal

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., "Ray, Debanjan  IN BLR SISL"
<debanjan.ray@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Mr. Malay Sanyal,
>
> I love debate. I understand that you perhaps did not like quotes from
Richard Dawkins. But, the statement is a scientific truth. It is a property
of genes.
> I agree with you that Brahmoism is transmitted from one generation to the
next. But, it is through culture, heritage and education.  Religion is
propagated through education only. When a child is born, (s)he knows nothing
about religion. (s)he has to be taught. Brahmoism is not natural
characteristics. We can test it through our own children. It is our duty to
propagate Brahmoism in the next generation.
>
>
> With best regards,
> Debanjan Ray
> ________________________________
> From: brahmoconferenceorg@... [mailto:
brahmoconferenceorg@...] On Behalf Of Malay Sanyal
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 2:37 PM
> To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear Saurav and friends
>
> There is a great deal being discussed on that other Yahoo "Brahmo" group
which we cannot agree with. I dont think we should dignify their nonsense
with our comments or educate them about Brahmo dharm either.
>
> In this message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconference/message/738
>
> their moderator Debajan Ray quotes Richard Dawkins with approval
>
> "Genes do indirectly control the manufacture of bodies, and the influence
is strictly one way: acquired characteristics are not inherited. No matter
how much knowledge and wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will
be passed on to your children by genetic means. Each new generation starts
from scratch. A body is the genes' way of preserving the genes unaltered."
>
> This flies in the face of True Brahmoism's second precept which upholds
transmission of information from one generation to the next by both genetic
and memetic techniques and upon which the caste and religious structure of
Brahmoism is based.
>
> Malay Sanyal
> President,
> Brahmo Conference Organisation
>
> --- In
brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>,
Saurav Brahmo <saurav@> wrote:

> >
> > Dear Mr Santosh,
> >
> > Mr Biswajit Datta and other psuedoBrahmo apologists are confused about
> > Brahmoism. True Brahmos on other hand are very clear about Brahmoism
> > and Brahma Dharma.
> >
> > For example,
> >
> > 1 - Brahmoism is the highest form of Hinduism
> > 2 - What passes for Hinduism today is a debased and perverted religion
> > 3 - Brahmoism does not need "leadership" or leaders.
> > 4 - Brahmos worship and adore One God - not leaders.
> > 5 - Brahmoism needs no marketing. The world beats its own path to the
> > maker of a better rat trap.
> >
> > What is sorely lacking today is the wider dissemination of information
> > about True Brahmoism and the crucial period of our history between
> > 1865 and 1925.
> >
> > Saurav
> > In Truth
> >
> > --- In

brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>,
santosh lavakare

> > <santoshlavakare@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Sir
> > >
> > > Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.
> > >
> > > Best wishes
> > > santosh
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
> > > Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
> > > religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
> > > acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
> > > religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
> > > discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
> > > fundamental issues :-
> > >
> > > a)Lack of leadership .
> > >
> > > b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
> > > primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
> > > subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
> > > dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
> > > similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
> > > where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
> > > positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
> > > brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
> > > . Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
> > > ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
> > > Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Biswajit Dutta
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
> > > <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
> > >
> > >     Dear Surajit uncle,
> > >
> > >     I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
> > > environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
> > > of us.
> > >
> > >     What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
> > > Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
> > > Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
> > > natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
> > > childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
> > > the book, Dawkins has mentioned:
> > >
> > >     "Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
> > > more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
> > > by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
> > > permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name."
> > >
> > >     Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
> > > after generations in the survival machines like us.
> > >
> > >     So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
> > > perhaps not; that's it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
> > > education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
> > > same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
> > > natural genetic propagation. That's why Brahmoism overall is dying
> > > down.
> > >
> > >     With best regards,
> > >     Debanjan Ray
> > >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________
> Important notice: This e-mail and any attachment there to contains

corporate proprietary information. If you have received it by mistake,
please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete this e-mail and its
attachments from your system.
> Thank You.
>

[Holger Lüttich]

Dear all,

 

potential is transmitted by genes - not details of personal aspects. A young man or women can develop more intelligence than his/her ancestors etc. A new generation can do a great step to a better life and live richer than their parents etc. Thats fact. Look at history! Transmitting of knowledge is nonsense!

 

Greatings,

H.L.
 


To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
From: malay.sanyal@...
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:25:22 +0530
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions








Dear Mr Ray
 
Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically validated. It is also incorrect.
 
Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways. Genetically or memetically.
 
The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath (founder of modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go underground.
 
Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient religions) include
 
1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us
4) Godhood of father.
 
Dr. Malay Sanyal
 
--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., "Ray, Debanjan  IN BLR SISL" <debanjan.ray@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Mr. Malay Sanyal,
>
> I love debate. I understand that you perhaps did not like quotes from Richard Dawkins. But, the statement is a scientific truth. It is a property of genes.
> I agree with you that Brahmoism is transmitted from one generation to the next. But, it is through culture, heritage and education.  Religion is propagated through education only. When a child is born, (s)he knows nothing about religion. (s)he has to be taught. Brahmoism is not natural characteristics. We can test it through our own children. It is our duty to propagate Brahmoism in the next generation.
>
>
> With best regards,
> Debanjan Ray
> ________________________________
> From: brahmoconferenceorg@... [mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...] On Behalf Of Malay Sanyal
> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 2:37 PM
> To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear Saurav and friends
>
> There is a great deal being discussed on that other Yahoo "Brahmo" group which we cannot agree with. I dont think we should dignify their nonsense with our comments or educate them about Brahmo dharm either.
>
> In this message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/brahmoconference/message/738
>
> their moderator Debajan Ray quotes Richard Dawkins with approval
>
> "Genes do indirectly control the manufacture of bodies, and the influence is strictly one way: acquired characteristics are not inherited. No matter how much knowledge and wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will be passed on to your children by genetic means. Each new generation starts from scratch. A body is the genes' way of preserving the genes unaltered."
>
> This flies in the face of True Brahmoism's second precept which upholds transmission of information from one generation to the next by both genetic and memetic techniques and upon which the caste and religious structure of Brahmoism is based.
>
> Malay Sanyal
> President,
> Brahmo Conference Organisation
>
> --- In brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>, Saurav Brahmo <saurav@> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Mr Santosh,
> >
> > Mr Biswajit Datta and other psuedoBrahmo apologists are confused about
> > Brahmoism. True Brahmos on other hand are very clear about Brahmoism
> > and Brahma Dharma.
> >
> > For example,
> >
> > 1 - Brahmoism is the highest form of Hinduism
> > 2 - What passes for Hinduism today is a debased and perverted religion
> > 3 - Brahmoism does not need "leadership" or leaders.
> > 4 - Brahmos worship and adore One God - not leaders.
> > 5 - Brahmoism needs no marketing. The world beats its own path to the
> > maker of a better rat trap.
> >
> > What is sorely lacking today is the wider dissemination of information
> > about True Brahmoism and the crucial period of our history between
> > 1865 and 1925.
> >
> > Saurav
> > In Truth
> >
> > --- In brahmoconferenceorg@...<mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...>, santosh lavakare
> > <santoshlavakare@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Sir
> > >
> > > Can you kindly explain what Brahmoism is when it is not Hinduism.
> > >
> > > Best wishes
> > > santosh
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear Mr. Debanjan Ray ,
> > > Why only Brahmoism , your logic should apply to all religions . No
> > > religion is transmitted genetically . Religious instruction is an
> > > acquired behaviour , all that we learn from our ancestors/current
> > > religious leaders . The root cause of Brahmoism's decline has been
> > > discussed several times over in this forum . I think there are two
> > > fundamental issues :-
> > >
> > > a)Lack of leadership .
> > >
> > > b)Inability to differentiate our religion in the eyes of common people
> > > primarily from Hinduism & Christianity . People mistake us as being a
> > > subset of Hindu religion . Else our liberal mores/absence of rigid
> > > dogmas & rituals make commoners dub us as Christians or something
> > > similar to Christians . This is akin to the classic marketing problem
> > > where a failure/non success of a product is often ascribed to poor
> > > positioning or absence of brand salience/differentiator . The Brahmo
> > > brand is no longer perceived to be unique & it's all about perceptions
> > > . Our identity has been diffused & we have failed to communicate our
> > > ideals effectively post the halcyon days of Rammohun & Debendranath .
> > > Hence the dwindling popularity of Brahmo Samaj in the present era .
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Biswajit Dutta
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL
> > > <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
> > >
> > >     Dear Surajit uncle,
> > >
> > >     I do fully agree with you that the apart from Genes, the
> > > environment, the culture, family values influences and motivates all
> > > of us.
> > >
> > >     What I wanted to say is perhaps different. If you read the book by
> > > Dawkins ( I heard that the book is one of the best sellers and made
> > > Dawkin famous) it shall reveal that genes, are the causes of our
> > > natural behavior. The education, value system, whatever we learn since
> > > childhood is not a part of our natural behavior. In the beginning of
> > > the book, Dawkins has mentioned:
> > >
> > >     "Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' is really a special case of a
> > > more general law of survival of the stable. The universe is populated
> > > by stable things. A stable thing is a collection of atoms that is
> > > permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name."
> > >
> > >     Genes are the most stable molecules. They survived generation
> > > after generations in the survival machines like us.
> > >
> > >     So, my question: Whether Brahmoism is a part of our gene? It is
> > > perhaps not; that's it is not stable. It is the acquired behavior ( an
> > > education) which dies down with individual. I can not propagate the
> > > same Brahmoism which I learnt, down to my children. It is not a
> > > natural genetic propagation. That's why Brahmoism overall is dying
> > > down.
> > >
> > >     With best regards,
> > >     Debanjan Ray
> > >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________
> Important notice: This e-mail and any attachment there to contains corporate proprietary information. If you have received it by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system.
> Thank You.
>

_________________________________________________________________
http://redirect.gimas.net/?n=M0904xIE8_MSN4_WW
Internet Explorer 8 jetzt für MSN  - kostenlos!

[Saurav Brahmogroups]

Dear friend

What Doctor Sanyal is saying is that knowledge of ancestors (ie personality
of ancestors) is capable of genetic transmission. The human genome of an
indivdual is unique and contains the complete genomic information of all the
individual's ancestry starting from the first organism mankind was
created from. This is scientific fact.

Saurav

RE: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions

 Dear all,

potential is transmitted by genes - not details of personal aspects. A young
man or women can develop more intelligence than his/her ancestors etc. A new
generation can do a great step to a better life and live richer than their
parents etc. Thats fact. Look at history! Transmitting of knowledge
is nonsense!

Greatings,
H.L.

------------------------------
To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
From: malay.sanyal@...
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:25:22 +0530
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions



Dear Mr Ray

Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically
validated. It is also incorrect.

Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways.
Genetically or memetically.

The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc
pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath (founder of
modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome
in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also
split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go
underground.

Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient
religions) include

1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was
experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within
us
4) Godhood of father.

Dr. Malay Sanyal

[biswajit dutta-2]

Mr. Malay Sanyal says "Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically" . He has not talked about personality of ancestors . Let's not try to wriggle out of tight corners & hem & haw . Transmission of Brahmoism genetically does not convince . Brahmoism is an acquired trait .

Anyway , how are these theoretical discussions on genes & memes relevant to modern day Brahmos ? Why  create needless confusion ? Will such theories improve out stock ? Raise our profile ? Strenthen Brahmoism ? 
Biswajit Dutta

--- On Wed, 29/4/09, Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...> wrote:

From: Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...>
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
Date: Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 12:26 PM











   
           
           


     
      Dear friend
 
What Doctor Sanyal is saying is that knowledge of ancestors (ie personality of ancestors) is capable of genetic transmission. The human genome of an indivdual is unique and contains the complete genomic information of all the individual's ancestry starting from the first organism mankind was created from. This is scientific fact.

 
Saurav
 
RE: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions


Dear all,
 
potential is transmitted by genes - not details of personal aspects. A young man or women can develop more intelligence than his/her ancestors etc. A new generation can do a great step to a better life and live richer than their parents etc. Thats fact. Look at history! Transmitting of knowledge is nonsense!

 
Greatings,
H.L.
 


To: brahmoconferenceorg @yahoogroups. com
From: malay.sanyal@ ...
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:25:22 +0530
Subject: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions








Dear Mr Ray
 
Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically validated. It is also incorrect.
 
Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways. Genetically or memetically.
 
The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath  (founder of modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go underground.

 
Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient religions) include
 
1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us
4) Godhood of father.
 
Dr. Malay Sanyal

 

     

   
   
       
         
       
       








       


       
       


      Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter http://beta.cricket.yahoo.com

[Saurav Brahmogroups]

Dear Friend

Dr Sanyal has said that and more. His original message is contained below

"1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was
experimentally proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove
today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us"

It is clear that he is saying that all the information / knowledge of
our ancestors is within us through genetic transmission also.
Brahmanism is not an acquired trait, it is acquired genetically and
reinforced memetically.

Senior Brahmos such as Dr Sanyal are better suited to reply to the
other points of your message.

Saurav

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., biswajit dutta
<bis_dutta2000@...> wrote:

>
> Mr. Malay Sanyal says "Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically" . He has not talked about personality of ancestors . Let's not try to wriggle out of tight corners & hem & haw . Transmission of Brahmoism genetically does not convince . Brahmoism is an acquired trait .
>
> Anyway , how are these theoretical discussions on genes & memes relevant to modern day Brahmos ? Why  create needless confusion ? Will such theories improve out stock ? Raise our profile ? Strenthen Brahmoism ?
> Biswajit Dutta
>
> --- On Wed, 29/4/09, Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...> wrote:
>
> From: Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...>
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
> To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
> Date: Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 12:26 PM
>
> Dear friend
>
> What Doctor Sanyal is saying is that knowledge of ancestors (ie personality of ancestors) is capable of genetic transmission. The human genome of an indivdual is unique and contains the complete genomic information of all the individual's ancestry starting from the first organism mankind was created from. This is scientific fact.
>
>
> Saurav
>
> RE: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> potential is transmitted by genes - not details of personal aspects. A young man or women can develop more intelligence than his/her ancestors etc. A new generation can do a great step to a better life and live richer than their parents etc. Thats fact. Look at history! Transmitting of knowledge is nonsense!
>
>
> Greatings,
> H.L.
>
>
>
> To: brahmoconferenceorg @yahoogroups. com
> From: malay.sanyal@ ...
> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:25:22 +0530
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear Mr Ray
>
> Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically validated. It is also incorrect.
>
> Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways. Genetically or memetically.
>
> The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath  (founder of modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go underground.
>
>
> Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient religions) include
>
> 1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
> 2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
> 3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us
> 4) Godhood of father.
>
> Dr. Malay Sanyal

[Ray, Debanjan IN BLR SISL]

Dear Dr. Sanyal,

With my very little knowledge about genetics, following are some scientific truths:
1) In Human beings, most body cells contains 46 chromosomes( 23 pairs). Out of each pair of chromosomes, one comes from father; another from mother - intact.
2) Each chromosome contains one single DNA; and each DNA contains multiple genes. For every characteristic, there is a gene. One gene from one chromosome(say from father), has got one equivalent gene in another chromosome(from father). But only one is active (dominant); another one is recessive.
3) When one body cell divides into another body cell through normal cell division, called as mitosis, two cells contain identical 23 pairs of chromosomes; again one chromosome is from father, another from mother - intact.
4) But when a child is produced, a special cell division called as meiosis occurs, where the sperm or egg cell is produced, which contain ONLY 23 chromosomes. Each of these chromosomes contains one gene for one characteristic which means the gene either comes from father, or from mother. So, sperm or egg cell has partial information of ancestors.
5) When fertilization takes place, egg cell and sperm cell contribute 23 chromosomes each, thus again making 23 pairs. So the resultant child contains ONLY PARTIAL PROPERTIES of his/her paternal grandfather, paternal grandmother, maternal grandfather and maternal grandmother.

Thus, following statements are not correct:
"2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us"

With best regards,
Debanjan Ray
________________________________________
From: brahmoconferenceorg@... [mailto:brahmoconferenceorg@...] On Behalf Of Saurav Brahmo
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:51 PM
To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions




Dear Friend

Dr Sanyal has said that and more. His original message is contained below

"1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was
experimentally proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove
today)
2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us"

It is clear that he is saying that all the information / knowledge of
our ancestors is within us through genetic transmission also.
Brahmanism is not an acquired trait, it is acquired genetically and
reinforced memetically.

Senior Brahmos such as Dr Sanyal are better suited to reply to the
other points of your message.

Saurav

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., biswajit dutta
<bis_dutta2000@...> wrote:

>
> Mr. Malay Sanyal says "Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically" . He has not talked about personality of ancestors . Let's not try to wriggle out of tight corners & hem & haw . Transmission of Brahmoism genetically does not convince . Brahmoism is an acquired trait .
>
> Anyway , how are these theoretical discussions on genes & memes relevant to modern day Brahmos ? Why  create needless confusion ? Will such theories improve out stock ? Raise our profile ? Strenthen Brahmoism ?
> Biswajit Dutta
>
> --- On Wed, 29/4/09, Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...> wrote:
>
> From: Saurav Brahmo <saurav@...>
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceorg] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
> To: brahmoconferenceorg@...
> Date: Wednesday, 29 April, 2009, 12:26 PM
>
> Dear friend
>
> What Doctor Sanyal is saying is that knowledge of ancestors (ie personality of ancestors) is capable of genetic transmission. The human genome of an indivdual is unique and contains the complete genomic information of all the individual's ancestry starting from the first organism mankind was created from. This is scientific fact.
>
>
> Saurav
>
> RE: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> potential is transmitted by genes - not details of personal aspects. A young man or women can develop more intelligence than his/her ancestors etc. A new generation can do a great step to a better life and live richer than their parents etc. Thats fact. Look at history! Transmitting of knowledge is nonsense!
>
>
> Greatings,
> H.L.
>
>
>
> To: brahmoconferenceorg @yahoogroups. com
> From: malay.sanyal@ ...
> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:25:22 +0530
> Subject: [brahmoconferenceor g] Re: [brahmoconference] Contributions
>
>
> Dear Mr Ray
>
> Mr Dawkin's statement is his opinion and has not been scientifically validated. It is also incorrect.
>
> Brahmoism, and information, is transmitted in at least 2 ways. Genetically or memetically.
>
> The human "genome" today has around 3 or 4 billion components (DNA / RNA etc pairs). It was the Tattwabodhini under young Master Hemendranath  (founder of modern True Brahmoism) to whom were revealed the secrets of the human genome in about 1861. The power of this revelation transformed Brahmoism and also split it asunder and caused the Tattwabodhini (and its secrets) to go underground.
>
>
> Cardinal precepts of Brahmoism (and pure Vedic Hinduism and many ancient religions) include
>
> 1) Information / knowledge is transmitted genetically (this was experimentaly proveable in 19th century and is trivial to prove today)
> 2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
> 3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us
> 4) Godhood of father.
>
> Dr. Malay Sanyal

Important notice: This e-mail and any attachment there to contains corporate proprietary information. If you have received it by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete this e-mail and its attachments from your system.
Thank You.

[Malay Sanyal]

Dear Mr Ray,

It is correct that you know quite little about genetics. The issue we
are discussing is genomics - specifically human genomics (human
genome) of which each human has about 3 or 4 BILLION pairs which is
stored in the 23 chromosomes you have mentioned.

All the statements I had listed are correct and are included within
the core precepts of Brahmoism which were decided in 1873 and which
are only now being (re)confirmed by modern scientific methods.

Dr Malay Sanyal

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., "Ray, Debanjan  IN BLR
SISL" <debanjan.ray@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Dr. Sanyal,
>
> With my very little knowledge about genetics, following are some scientific truths:
> 1) In Human beings, most body cells contains 46 chromosomes( 23 pairs). Out of each pair of chromosomes, one comes from father; another from mother - intact.
> 2) Each chromosome contains one single DNA; and each DNA contains multiple genes. For every characteristic, there is a gene. One gene from one chromosome(say from father), has got one equivalent gene in another chromosome(from father). But only one is active (dominant); another one is recessive.
> 3) When one body cell divides into another body cell through normal cell division, called as mitosis, two cells contain identical 23 pairs of chromosomes; again one chromosome is from father, another from mother - intact.
> 4) But when a child is produced, a special cell division called as meiosis occurs, where the sperm or egg cell is produced, which contain ONLY 23 chromosomes. Each of these chromosomes contains one gene for one characteristic which means the gene either comes from father, or from mother. So, sperm or egg cell has partial information of ancestors.
> 5) When fertilization takes place, egg cell and sperm cell contribute 23 chromosomes each, thus again making 23 pairs. So the resultant child contains ONLY PARTIAL PROPERTIES of his/her paternal grandfather, paternal grandmother, maternal grandfather and maternal grandmother.
>
> Thus, following statements are not correct:
> "2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
> 3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and within us"
>
> With best regards,
> Debanjan Ray

[Rahul Dev Sharma]

Dear Brahmo Friends

With all respect to my elders, these kinds of discussions will not
result in anything tangible. We must acknowledge the schisms,
controversies and divisions which are behind this stalemate. For
example

a) Brahmos are Brahmins controversy
b) Brahmos are Hindus / not Hindus controversy
c) The precepts from History of the Adi Brahmo Samaj controversy
d) The Kriya Yoga origin controversy
e) The "what really happened on the Rishikesh hill ?" controversy
f) The ghoola controversy
g) The saibaba controversy

Until these are squarely debated the neccessity of groups like ours reduces.

Rahul

On 5/1/09, Malay Sanyal <malay.sanyal@...> wrote:

> Dear Mr Ray,
>
> It is correct that you know quite little about genetics. The issue we
> are discussing is genomics - specifically human genomics (human
> genome) of which each human has about 3 or 4 BILLION pairs which is
> stored in the 23 chromosomes you have mentioned.
>
> All the statements I had listed are correct and are included within
> the core precepts of Brahmoism which were decided in 1873 and which
> are only now being (re)confirmed by modern scientific methods.
>
> Dr Malay Sanyal
>
> --- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., "Ray, Debanjan  IN BLR
> SISL" <debanjan.ray@...> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Dr. Sanyal,
>>
>> With my very little knowledge about genetics, following are some
>> scientific truths:
>> 1) In Human beings, most body cells contains 46 chromosomes( 23 pairs).
>> Out of each pair of chromosomes, one comes from father; another from
>> mother - intact.
>> 2) Each chromosome contains one single DNA; and each DNA contains multiple
>> genes. For every characteristic, there is a gene. One gene from one
>> chromosome(say from father), has got one equivalent gene in another
>> chromosome(from father). But only one is active (dominant); another one is
>> recessive.
>> 3) When one body cell divides into another body cell through normal cell
>> division, called as mitosis, two cells contain identical 23 pairs of
>> chromosomes; again one chromosome is from father, another from mother -
>> intact.
>> 4) But when a child is produced, a special cell division called as meiosis
>> occurs, where the sperm or egg cell is produced, which contain ONLY 23
>> chromosomes. Each of these chromosomes contains one gene for one
>> characteristic which means the gene either comes from father, or from
>> mother. So, sperm or egg cell has partial information of ancestors.
>> 5) When fertilization takes place, egg cell and sperm cell contribute 23
>> chromosomes each, thus again making 23 pairs. So the resultant child
>> contains ONLY PARTIAL PROPERTIES of his/her paternal grandfather, paternal
>> grandmother, maternal grandfather and maternal grandmother.
>>
>> Thus, following statements are not correct:
>> "2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
>> 3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and
>> within us"
>>
>> With best regards,
>> Debanjan Ray
>

[Malay Sanyal]

Dear Rahul,

It woul be futile to discuss your "controversies" here.  For the most
part these are controversies only for the unitiated and sharing our
knowledge would be like casting pearls in this time of swine flu.

Malay Sanyal

--- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., Rahul Dev Sharma
<rahul.dvsharma@...> wrote:

>
> Dear Brahmo Friends
>
> With all respect to my elders, these kinds of discussions will not
> result in anything tangible. We must acknowledge the schisms,
> controversies and divisions which are behind this stalemate. For
> example
>
> a) Brahmos are Brahmins controversy
> b) Brahmos are Hindus / not Hindus controversy
> c) The precepts from History of the Adi Brahmo Samaj controversy
> d) The Kriya Yoga origin controversy
> e) The "what really happened on the Rishikesh hill ?" controversy
> f) The ghoola controversy
> g) The saibaba controversy
>
> Until these are squarely debated the neccessity of groups like ours reduces.
>
> Rahul
>
> On 5/1/09, Malay Sanyal <malay.sanyal@...> wrote:
> > Dear Mr Ray,
> >
> > It is correct that you know quite little about genetics. The issue we
> > are discussing is genomics - specifically human genomics (human
> > genome) of which each human has about 3 or 4 BILLION pairs which is
> > stored in the 23 chromosomes you have mentioned.
> >
> > All the statements I had listed are correct and are included within
> > the core precepts of Brahmoism which were decided in 1873 and which
> > are only now being (re)confirmed by modern scientific methods.
> >
> > Dr Malay Sanyal
> >
> > --- In brahmoconferenceorg@..., "Ray, Debanjan  IN BLR
> > SISL" <debanjan.ray@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Dr. Sanyal,
> >>
> >> With my very little knowledge about genetics, following are some
> >> scientific truths:
> >> 1) In Human beings, most body cells contains 46 chromosomes( 23 pairs).
> >> Out of each pair of chromosomes, one comes from father; another from
> >> mother - intact.
> >> 2) Each chromosome contains one single DNA; and each DNA contains multiple
> >> genes. For every characteristic, there is a gene. One gene from one
> >> chromosome(say from father), has got one equivalent gene in another
> >> chromosome(from father). But only one is active (dominant); another one is
> >> recessive.
> >> 3) When one body cell divides into another body cell through normal cell
> >> division, called as mitosis, two cells contain identical 23 pairs of
> >> chromosomes; again one chromosome is from father, another from mother -
> >> intact.
> >> 4) But when a child is produced, a special cell division called as meiosis
> >> occurs, where the sperm or egg cell is produced, which contain ONLY 23
> >> chromosomes. Each of these chromosomes contains one gene for one
> >> characteristic which means the gene either comes from father, or from
> >> mother. So, sperm or egg cell has partial information of ancestors.
> >> 5) When fertilization takes place, egg cell and sperm cell contribute 23
> >> chromosomes each, thus again making 23 pairs. So the resultant child
> >> contains ONLY PARTIAL PROPERTIES of his/her paternal grandfather, paternal
> >> grandmother, maternal grandfather and maternal grandmother.
> >>
> >> Thus, following statements are not correct:
> >> "2) That we are the sum of our ancestors
> >> 3) That we contain all our ancestors in our genes and our bodies and
> >> within us"
> >>
> >> With best regards,
> >> Debanjan Ray
> >
>