"You're again going into books other than Bhagwat Gita." I'm saying this one last time! Bhagwat Gita is literally the part of Mahabharata itself. đ¤Śââď¸ Mahabharata is divided into 18 books (or sections) and Bhagwat Gita is in sixth book (know as Bhishma Parva) of Mahabharata. I'm repeating myself again; Bhagwat Gita is found in the sixth/6th book of Mahabharata. Both of these are authored by Krishna DvaipÄyana also known as Veda VyÄsa. Veda VyÄsa also classified/divided the Vedas and composed the Puranas. He is even considered one of the seven Chiranjivis (immortals) (another huge myth). Even the festival of Guru Purnima is dedicated to him. Here's are my question: 1)How do you doubt the authenticity of Mahabharata, yet claim Bhagwat Gita is a word of God (which itself is PRESENT in the same book of epic Mahabharata)? When both (Mahabharata and Gita) are authored by the same person; Veda Vyasa, how do you selectively decide what's authentic or not? (Your feelings don't count as rational evidence) 2) Without providing evidence for existence of any God? How do you claim Bhagwat Gita as "Word of God"? 3) Vedas, Upanishads and Puranasâ Are all of these corrupted or unauthentic scriptures? If they're unauthentic why even have them? Are they useless? Atleast the Muslims preach Quran by (falsely) claiming that it is divinely protected from being altered.Next, Ramanuja Charya fought against caste system? (Evidence provided: None) (tbh he never fought against it, he neither promoted it much or nor opposed it) Even if he did:- Doesn't that mean birth based caste system existed in ancient India? You previously alleged that it's not based on birth. Now you claim a theologian fought against it? Pick one stance already. (This also proves Ancient India was not highly civilized as modern Hindus claim.) So you clearly threw away Adi Shankaracharya's commentary out of the window? He wasn't just some random person. He is the most influential and prominent figure who consolidated the doctrine of "Advaita Vedanta".Anyway here's what your favorite Ramanujacharya comments about Bhagwat Gita 18.41 â"The character of BrÄhmaášas, Kᚣatriyas, Vaishyas, and ĹĹŤdras arise from their various inherent dispositions. In other words their past Karma is the cause of their being born in a specific social group."Boom! Used your favorite theologian's commentary, happy now? So yes, Varna or caste is decided by what social clan/family/tribe you are born in and not by occupation you choose. If a person is born into a Shudra family, his only Dharma (or purpose) is to be slave of Brahmanis or Ksatriyas. Justification? bRo He DiD bAd DeEdS iN pAsT LiFe bRo. If he failed in fulfilling his "Dharmic duties", he would be born as something/someone more worse. If he fulfills his "Dharmic" duties he would be reborn into upper clan or caste. Ridiculous dehumanization of people. Here's something more shocking for you, Ramanujacharya mentions and sometimes even quotes verses from Upanishads, Vedas and Puranas. So did he quoted from scriptures which are unauthentic?Read your own books and commentaries before preaching ffs. Source:- https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/ramanuja_gita_bhashya.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjl0cPGxJrqAhUTfH0KHatODoQQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw25ubVyL86q5XOMSj7lwp75&cshid=1593006404400Ian Stevensonâ The thing is; to even use reincarnation as "hypothesis" you first need to prove existence of soul, then the nature of soul, then soul being present inside human body, then soul being eternal. Only when the existence of soul is proven as fact, we can discuss reincarnation. (Also God's existence too) Here's what he speculated though: "Maybe our beliefs determine our fate: If you believe you will come back, but only as a member of your own faith, that's what happens. If you believe you simply die and don't come back, you don't" (Shroder 1999: 77). The thing in Ian Stevenson never talked about reincarnation based on Karma or actions based on previous life (like your religion claims). Another shock for you is that Ian Stevenson himself never called it a "fact", (you lied bro) I challenge you to present such statements from any of his books. No mainstream biologist or neuro-scientist affirmed his works. He has been refuted!Please read critically with free mindâ Reincarnation: A Critical Examination (1996) by Paul Edwards Also this explains his statements with refutations:- http://skepdic.com/stevenson.htmlHere's more logical and rational debunksâ https://youtu.be/PiAWDV2jI1g https://youtu.be/vbpHF9jjos4 https://youtu.be/DOMk1VOwbpUThe issue here is, you Hindus glorify him as the "Supreme infallible scientist", the actual reality is that he isn't. No scientist took him seriously because he lacked evidences, Charles Darwin is taken more seriously though. Muslims too glorify Keith Moore as being some "hyper intelligent" embryologist to prove their Quranic Embryology "miracle". Some quick rebuttalsâ 1) If reincarnation is true and everybody is reborn again & again. Then what about the growing population? 2) If we don't remember any thing from the past lives then are we really "we" from the past life? Are we the same soul/person from the past? 3) Fossil records indicate that Homo Sapiens (us, humans) first appeared 300,000 years ago. When exactly did the reincarnation process started in the history of human evolution? During Homo habilis, Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis or during Homo Neanderthals? During which evolutionary period did reincarnation precisely began? 4)One day Sun would eventually cause extinction of all life on Earth while the universe will continue to exist. Who would be reincarnated then?Let's assume you're right, here are religions which believe in reincarnation:- Orphic Mysteries (5th century BC) Pythagoreanism (6th century BC) Druzism (11th century) Celtism (500 BCE) Taoism (4th century BCE) Jainism Buddhism SikhismNow on what criteria did you selectively choose your religion? Just because you're born in a clan/family where people practice it?Life and death isn't the darkest mystery of universe. Science has already explained them. We have progressed, we even know quality details about origin of life through Abiogenesis. And evolution of life forms by natural selection. Evolution has more concrete evidences than your vague "reincarnation" myth. Evidences includes Anatomy, Molecular biology, Biogeography, Direct observation, etc. Death? It's the permanent cessation of all biological functions that sustain a living organism. When you die your conciousness ends, in other terms the processes which keeps your conciousness active, stops. And you cease to exist. Life and death both are natural phenomenons, ain't nothing mysterious about them. Organisms born, majority of them reproduce and all of them die. Stop living in your own fantasy dream world. Embrace death as natural and inevitable. You most likely believe in reincarnation as it provides you comfort, comfort from "horrors" of non-existence and ceasing to exist."Krishna explained it to Arjuna 5000 years ago". Yea sure! An omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient deity explained the "secrets" of the cosmos to a random guy in battlefield. Oh, and yes his favourite Galaxy was Milky Way and his planet was Earth, further more his favourite country was India, his beloved human was Arjuna. Do you not see this through this bullshit and lie? All of you theists basically think the same dumb way. Muslims be like Allah revealed the truth to our prophet somewhere in middle East. Imagine being an all-powerful deity and revealing "secrets" of universe to random single individual in South Asia, morever during a war. Also what "secrets" of the universe does your Bhagwat Gita unlocks? Black holes? Cure for cancer? Time travel? Way electrons move at sub-atomic level? Germ theory? Dark energy? Nope! All it contains is war, bloodshed, some random morals, casteism and fairtytales. Your religion requires mere mortal human beings to survive, that's the most evident logical proof that it's man-made thrash. Yea and I believe Stephen Hawkings to be physical manifestation of God because he unlocked "secrets" of the universe. Duhh Facts are not your feelings. Truth cannot be based on what you feel. Some prophet flying on an animal is exactly foolish claim as a monkey flying or picking up mountains. "It need not to be factual correct as its just a story." Ok I get it, it's a story written by humans so it's prone to inaccuracies and mistakes. But so is Bhagwa Gita. lmao! It's too written by humans lol. Can't it be a local folklore, fictious story written by humans and attributed to God? Such as Torah or Quran? Lmao. How do you determine which part is true and which part is incorrect from both of these scriptures? Based on your feelings alone? That's doesn't count!"The Big Ape or Monkey swam across the ocean. Still Ramayana makes sense. Maybe The Monkey swam so fast that it looked like it flew across the ocean. That's why Valmiki might have taken that poetic liberty. I agree that it couldn't fly but it must have swam across the ocean, what makes you think A Giant Ape couldn't?"Read this statement thrice to understand how nonsensical it sounds. "A giant ape "maybe" swam so fast that it looked like it flew"? And that makes sense to you? Wtf? That's not how majority of Hindus interprete it. Lol. I already told in the comment above, majority of Hindus take this story as literal. And what species was that "giant ape" and how did it gained intellectual human-like capabilities; ability to communicate and understand human speech, obey human orders and hyper scifi superpower ability to swim fast af. If a giant ape with extraordinary abilities exist, why can't Unicorns, Dwarfs, Chupacabra, etc exist? Also in your worldview based on mythology and fantasy, can't a giant ape have huge wings to fly? đ¤ˇââď¸ Even in this fictional story this makes more sense then your "swim fast theory". Shocking Fact for you:- No, great apes can't swim đ¤Śââď¸. Valmiki's poetic liberty? How do you know Valmiki didn't just fabricated the entire story itself and attributed it as history? "It didn't fly to heaven, it flew to an nearby island, Sri Lanka." Damn! Seems like you never read your own scriptures, Go read Valmiki's Ramayana: Book 4, Chapter 66. Hanuman in his childhood allegedly leaped into space towards the Sun thinking it was a ripe mango lol. While he was flying in space (oxygen?) another fictional deity Indra struck him. So, you either haven't read anything or you just straight up lied. Now what apologetic argument you have? Isn't this equivalent of Mohammad flying on a horse in space? If Valmiki can fabricate this entire chapter, doesn't that makes the entire Ramayana atleast dubious."Also, you have archaeological evidence that the stones on Ram Setu structure is Man Made and not natural." Yea, Muslims call it "Adams Bride" too. No, we don't have any archaeological evidence that the stone in it are man made. Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean that you're right. It means you're ignorant. Mate, just for a single day, study some science instead of ancient superstitious books. Ram Setu structure in science is called as Tombolo. And yes, we know the entire process as to how they are formed naturally. Natural processes such as Wave diffraction and refraction, etc. Tombolos are also prone to natural fluctuations or changes due to various natural factors.Their are various Tombolos on Earth right now. Such as: â˘The Angel Road of Shodo Island, Japan, â˘Aupouri Peninsula, New Zealand, â˘Barrenjoey Headland, Pittwater, New South Wales, Australia â˘Gwadar, Pakistan, etc. Go read the list yourself:- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tombolo#:~:text=A%20tombolo%2C%20from%20the%20Italian,known%20as%20a%20tied%20island.Here's more detailed refutation for superstitious claims like yours. http://ianchadwick.com/blog/debunking-the-adam-bridge/"If you find it faulty, I'll remove Hindu from my name and Hinduism from my life." â đ¤ˇââď¸đ¤ˇ Do it lol