Is a Hinduism epic to blame for misogyny in India and the subcontinent?

[sensible-indian-fan]

What do you mean by "exact official take".. and no, my views about Krishna have always been the same.

Meaning your explanation is how I heard from people (who know religious texts) and who read official Valmiki Ramayana.

 

[tempus123]

Meaning your explanation is how I heard from people (who know religious texts) and who read official Valmiki Ramayana.

I read all the known and accepted versions of Ramayana and Mahabharata many times. May be somethings I missed, and my knowledge is limited here.

You on the other hand are an expert. Your answer on Rama's treatment of Sita and the explanation was bang on.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I read all the known and accepted versions of Ramayana and Mahabharata many times. May be somethings I missed, and my knowledge is limited here.

You on the other hand are an expert. Your answer on Rama's treatment of Sita and the explanation was bang on.

Haha...I am not the expert (not saying due to humility but I am really not unfortunately - don't have a strong basis in texts).

Must say #62 post of yours shocked me a bit.

Your point about male NOT being able to do any religious activity without his wife is something that many don't talk about but is 100% true. Rama used to miss Sita a lot too as you said.

 

[tempus123]

Hindu Gods make mistakes. They are prone to a lot of things like jealousy, ego like normal people.

I think neither of these two Gods can be blamed of jealousy and ego. I don't recall either (Rama or Krishna) of them showing these two traits.

 

[Itachi]

it is undeniable that many societies derive their culture and morality from religion to some extent

Hinduism wasn't the only religion back then.

It was localized so it will be an invalid assumption if you attribute everything to Hinduism.

 

[Itachi]

His decision making was perfectly in sync with what had to be done.

The rule was that Kings must be BEYOND a shadow of doubt and if they put themselves in a position where they CAN BE DOUBTED (like Sita did), then they have to take in corrective measures till the doubt is cleared from their minds.

Now we can debate the Vedic rule but the decisions of Rama are perfectly in sync with what was supposed to be done.

If we flip this around and ask if Rama was doubted for something he did, he would have stepped aside as the King. No questions asked. That's what he did when Keikeyi used a boon to banish him unfairly so that Bharatha could be the king (and Bharatha didn't even know about it).

Conflict of roles.

Failure as a husband.

Achievement as a king.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

Conflict of roles.

Failure as a husband.

Achievement as a king.

Can't deny it.

That part of the story affected me a lot.

King gets more importance than husband though.

 

[enkidu_]

2 points:

1. What Britishers read is inconsequential as to what is the truth about the religion. Its like reading Gita and declaring you know about Hinduism which is utter BS cos Gita is just one text (very imp no doubt) but not everything.
2. Itihas HAS a major place in rule making and is accepted by scholars.

My stance is 100% fine cos its the religious take.

In 1800s ANYTHING could have happened in remote villages. What does that prove pertaining to a religious discussion? Nothing.

You're right, Manu-smirit had no influence at all and the whole book was composed by Brahmin trolls for fun.

Also, that's from Koenraad Elst, a Belgian academic, pro Hindu and anti Islam, who links the khap panchayats with the Law of Manu :

Manu (as we shall call the anonymous author) explicitly acknowledges the validity of customary law: ‘He must consider as law that which the people’s religion sanctions’ (7:203). Much of what he describes was nothing but existing practice. Until the enactment of modern-laws by the British and the incipient Indian republic, the final authority for intra-caste disputes was the caste pañchâyat (‘council of five’), for inter-caste disputes the village pañchâyat, in which each local caste was represented and had a veto right. These councils were sovereign and not formally bound by the Manu Smrti or any other Shâstras, though these could be cite din the deliberations by way of advice.

https://www.academia.edu/4034270/Ma...nism_Nietzsche_and_Hindu_political_philosophy

^so these decisions don't come out of the blue either.

The Manu-smriti is an authoritative compendium of Hindu laws, so it has naturally been applied, to ask for "exact instances" in history (or fictitious epics) is ridiculous, as if every-time someone took notes of it in some report that we could find today. That was my point about khap panchayats/1800s (about mediatization).

There's a reason Wendy Doniger - one of the world specialists on India and Hinduism - calls Manu "the flag bearer for the Hindu oppression of women".

 

[Ottoman]

No, it's not a fiction. It's a story, probably true.

again probably?

Bro the thing is how can you allow people to change text of a story which is base of a religion. Ok interpretation can differ but not the text. You can change text.

Its even worse then changing a law with out prior approval of Parliament.

 

[Itachi]

again probably?

Bro the thing is how can you allow people to change text of a story which is base of a religion. Ok interpretation can differ but not the text. You can change text.

Its even worse then changing a law with out prior approval of Parliament.

Ramayana isn't base of Hinduism.
It also isn't based upon religion. Its a story.

 

[tempus123]

again probably?

Bro the thing is how can you allow people to change text of a story which is base of a religion. Ok interpretation can differ but not the text. You can change text.

Its even worse then changing a law with out prior approval of Parliament.

What's your point. The events happened more than 4000 years ago, how can one be sure of exact event details ?

It's a big misconception that any text can be preserved as is. It's outside the scope of this thread, but even Qur'an was written down as recollection many years after your prophet's death. That process involved verification and cross check, but it is still error prone. There is no scientific guarantee (apart from belief) that it is 100 % preserved.

 

[Ottoman]

What's your point. The events happened more than 4000 years ago, how can one be sure of exact event details ?

It's a big misconception that any text can be preserved as is. It's outside the scope of this thread, but even Qur'an was written down as recollection many years after your prophet's death. That process involved verification and cross check, but it is still error prone. There is no scientific guarantee (apart from belief) that it is 100 % preserved.

Quran is 100% preserved my friend as there is no book other than Quran which can be remembered word by word except Quran.

Bro my point is very clear, how can someone change a story which is as somebody posted above when the story is very prestigious to Hindhuism that means the religion has been tempered with.

 

[IgnitedMind]

Absolutely yes

If anybody said No..he is talking out of bias !

Ramayana is one of the most regressive ..and is one of important reasons why chastity is given importance...honor killings are rampant in haryana and the likes...and even the societal status of women stripping them of their personalities !

 

[CricketCartoons]

Absolutely yes

If anybody said No..he is talking out of bias !

Ramayana is one of the most regressive ..and is one of important reasons why chastity is given importance...honor killings are rampant in haryana and the likes...and even the societal status of women stripping them of their personalities !

Bollywood is major reason for misogyny in india today.

If anyone says No, he is talking out of bias.

Even a UN report says that Bollywood is misogynist. But Bollywood lackeys will always defend it.

 

[Slog]

Bollywood is major reason for misogyny in india today.

If anyone says No, he is talking out of bias.

Even a UN report says that Bollywood is misogynist. But Bollywood lackeys will always defend it.

Please dont derail threads and unnecessarily provacate.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Please dont derail threads and unnecessarily provacate.

Whenever I see IgnitedMind, I think of Bollywood..

 

[tempus123]

Quran is 100% preserved my friend as there is no book other than Quran which can be remembered word by word except Quran.

Bro my point is very clear, how can someone change a story which is as somebody posted above when the story is very prestigious to Hindhuism that means the religion has been tempered with.

Bhai Mahabharata is not a holy book for us. It was an event of a few hundred years which took place thousands of years ago. We don't call it a holy book. It is a damn good story though, stuff of many Bollywood movies and drama.

 

[Slog]

Bhai Mahabharata is not a holy book for us. It was an event of a few hundred years which took place thousands of years ago. We don't call it a holy book. It is a damn good story though, stuff of many Bollywood movies and drama.

who wrote it? so Hindus believe it is just fiction/fantasy?

 

[Itachi]

who wrote it? so Hindus believe it is just fiction/fantasy?

More or less yes.

 

[Tera Gawaandi]

Yes, but now India is fast becoming a misandrist society.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

You're right, Manu-smirit had no influence at all and the whole book was composed by Brahmin trolls for fun.

Also, that's from Koenraad Elst, a Belgian academic, pro Hindu and anti Islam, who links the khap panchayats with the Law of Manu :



https://www.academia.edu/4034270/Ma...nism_Nietzsche_and_Hindu_political_philosophy

^so these decisions don't come out of the blue either.

The Manu-smriti is an authoritative compendium of Hindu laws, so it has naturally been applied, to ask for "exact instances" in history (or fictitious epics) is ridiculous, as if every-time someone took notes of it in some report that we could find today. That was my point about khap panchayats/1800s (about mediatization).

There's a reason Wendy Doniger - one of the world specialists on India and Hinduism - calls Manu "the flag bearer for the Hindu oppression of women".

Wow......

Never thought the great enkidu will lose it and would get frustrated so badly.

When did I say Manu Smriti isn't important? It is.

Look at all your posts in this thread.

I just said all this brutality on women (like women are arrogant so let's throw them to the dogs) isn't actually how it works. I didn't deny the existence of such texts. We have had discussions about this in the past and I have NEVER EVER shied away from what's the truth. You know it very well.

You have been the one who has been pretty disrespectful with your mocking

"advise your Brahmin ladies to not get too close to dogs"

"You're right, Manu-smirit had no influence at all and the whole book was composed by Brahmin trolls for fun."

"If there weren't 24/7 news channels you'd barely hear of Haryanvi khap panchayats punishing disobedient women through gang-rape, so of course you'll not find many "legal certificates" attesting of these punishments."

.....but I have been respectfully discussing it with you.

Of course, Manu Smriti is oppressive on women. Its very restrictive not just for women but also for all castes. Agreed. But what's the context of our discussion. Go back and check it. I quoted and told you we can't blindly take these texts as it is for abstract stuff like arrogance, lack of duty to husband, etc and there is context and usage. There is more to it than what meets the eye which was my point.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

who wrote it? so Hindus believe it is just fiction/fantasy?

Mahabharatha is a religious book COMPILED by Ved Vyas.

Bhagavat Gita (which is essentially Krishna's speech to Arjuna) is a part of it.

It is an important religious book just like Ramayana.

Both are itihas.

Go here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism

Click on the right side expandable columns under Texts and see everything.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

again probably?

Bro the thing is how can you allow people to change text of a story which is base of a religion. Ok interpretation can differ but not the text. You can change text.

Its even worse then changing a law with out prior approval of Parliament.

Mahabharatha and Ramayana are texts and there is NO ONE out there claiming the texts in the original version have changed.

Mahabharatha official version is the Ved Vyas one.
Ramayana official version is the Valmiki one.

Even Vedic texts...no one claims they have been changed.

Interpretation varies but that's about it.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

[MENTION=29597]e[/MENTION]nkidu - The link you gave me says this:

“When a woman capable of conceiving a child becomes widow then she may contract Niyoga with the appointed Husband to beget children” Arya Samaj commentary on the Rig Vedic verse 10.18.8, page 512[Source: http://aryasamajjamnagar.org/rugveda_v5/pages/p512.gif ]

The Rigved 10.18.8 verse is spoken by the Husband’s Brother. So when the husband dies leaving behind wife and no children then the wife should contract Niyoga with her brother in law or Brahmin, in simple words the widow becomes an object of lust and child production factory.

Amazing this is.

I am sure all the widows in our families were being sent to be with the husbands brother to make children. I agree.

A year back, I was explained the intricacies of it when discussing some other topic. A woman (if there is no heir to the kingdom) can get together with the husband's brother (or a certain individual as decribed in the texts) for the purpose. As seen from Veda Vyaasa fathering Pandavas and Kauravas.

This is from Mahabharatha

Shortly after his marriage, Vichitravirya died of tuberculosis. As he had died without an heir, Bhishma was asked by Satyavatī to produce the next generation of Kurus through Vichitravirya's wives, Ambika and Ambalika. But Bhishma declined this as he had already vowed to remain celibate for life. He instructed Satyavatī to instead summon Satyavatī's other son Vyasa to father grandchildren for her through niyoga dharma. Ambika subsequently gave birth to Dhritarashtra, while Ambalika bore Pandu.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichitravirya

Even that is not accepted in Kali Yuga according to scholars who say people will misuse it in this Yuga.

This is what happens with random texts and explanations. There is WAY more to it than what meets the eye. There isn't a comprehensive data on Hinduism on the INTERNET unlike other religions. So we can't randomly take internet texts by dodgy writers who may not have read the complete texts and know the context.

And for you calling the itihas as fictitious epics....may I remind you that Gita is part of Mahabharatha and that text forms a VERY VERY VERY important part of the religion.

 

[tempus123]

who wrote it? so Hindus believe it is just fiction/fantasy?

Mahabharata was penned by lord Ganesha and authored by ved vyas. You can either consider their version fantasy depending on belief in Ganesha or consider the events actually happened. It is historically always undecided.

 

[KingKhanWC]

She passes the test of fire but fails the test of false whispers against her.

Logic should have said 'hi'..and prevailed.

 

[Truth_Hurts]

some people for publicity wrote these novels called "ramayana" and "mahabharatha"...
dont take these novels seriously

 

[Slog]

[MENTION=142162]Napa[/MENTION] - thoughts on OP and SIFs posts

 

[Bubby]

I was following this discussion where I learned about Rama and Sita.

Now I don't for one second profess to know the context of the story or the intricacies of the religion and neither is my intention to attack a religion so correct and educate me if I'm wrong. But this is what I understand at a basic level.

1) Sita, wife of Lord Rama, was abducted by Ravana and kept in captivity for years.

2) When Sita was finally liberated there were whispers about her being taken advantage of by Ravana while this was not true.

3) Instead of supporting her publicly, Lord Rama held a public chastity and purity trial in order to prove her purity this tying the concept of a woman's honour to this. This is a problem which plagues subcontinental society till today and maybe a result of this. There was no reason for such an exercise to be conducted because she had no control and if there was something like a forced situation then it is clearly not her fault so why should she be punished for it?

4) apparently later Sita was banished from society despite proving her chastity because the whispers and doubts against her from society didn't stop and Lord Rama did not want to be a King whose wife had such allegations on her despite the fact that they were proven to not be true.

Now if the above events are correctly understood it definitely seems problematic for me considering its part of a Hindu sage.

It ties a woman's honour to her chastity and puts the message that if an aggressor can forcefully take advantage of her the woman is 'damaged goods.'

What do posters think? Hopefully we can have a mature conversation about this.

the story is incomplete, it is said that before his battle against khara dushana Rama and sita ji knew about the future hence on instance of Rama created chhaya sita or illusion sita and real sita was send under the custody of lord Agni the god of fire so after the Agni pariksha the real sita arrived along with Agni and lord Rama narrated the whole story to everybody present there, it is said that the illusion sita had three births, in her birth she was vedvati whom ravana tried to abduct and she self immolated and while dying swore to destroy ravana and it's lineage, in second life she is chhaya sita who was abducted by ravana and hence fulfilled the revenge and in third birth she became draupadi again responsible for the end of evil.

 

[TM Riddle]

India I can understand but Subcontinent?
Is the op trying to imply the sexist practices prevalent among subcontinental Muslims have their origins in Hinduism?

 

[Napa]

I was following this discussion where I learned about Rama and Sita.

Now I don't for one second profess to know the context of the story or the intricacies of the religion and neither is my intention to attack a religion so correct and educate me if I'm wrong. But this is what I understand at a basic level.

1) Sita, wife of Lord Rama, was abducted by Ravana and kept in captivity for years.

2) When Sita was finally liberated there were whispers about her being taken advantage of by Ravana while this was not true.

3) Instead of supporting her publicly, Lord Rama held a public chastity and purity trial in order to prove her purity this tying the concept of a woman's honour to this. This is a problem which plagues subcontinental society till today and maybe a result of this. There was no reason for such an exercise to be conducted because she had no control and if there was something like a forced situation then it is clearly not her fault so why should she be punished for it?

4) apparently later Sita was banished from society despite proving her chastity because the whispers and doubts against her from society didn't stop and Lord Rama did not want to be a King whose wife had such allegations on her despite the fact that they were proven to not be true.

Now if the above events are correctly understood it definitely seems problematic for me considering its part of a Hindu sage.

It ties a woman's honour to her chastity and puts the message that if an aggressor can forcefully take advantage of her the woman is 'damaged goods.'

What do posters think? Hopefully we can have a mature conversation about this.

There are many layers to this story.

1) Wives being treated as property of the husband who can force them to undergo a purity test in public.

2) The ruler, in this case Rama, needing to be a model, and hence setting a especially high standard for his wife. Similar to Julius Caesar who divorced his wife Pompeia, saying that "my wife ought not even to be under suspicion."

3) The power which women had in a relationship, in that Sita chose to leave Rama as a result of his requiring her to undertake the purity test. Rama was the incarnation of Vishnu, but she was defiant in leaving him.

4) The fluidity in Hindu thinking, as opposed to the absolutism of the Semitic (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) religions. If your Prophet commanded a woman, she would not defy him and still be held in high esteem. There are both advantages and disadvantages to fluid thinking and absolutism.

5) Again, there are multiple examples of incidents unfavorable to women that can be found in Torah/Tarwat and Psalms/Zabur, texts which are held to be divinely revealed by all 3 Semitic religions. Religious texts are complicated, you can find stuff to prove various different contradictory viewpoints. So I would not say the Ram and Sita example led to any sort of alleged misogyny.

 

[indipper]

Extremism! of Religion and secularism. There's no middle ground now.

 

[Slog]

I was following this discussion where I learned about Rama and Sita.

Now I don't for one second profess to know the context of the story or the intricacies of the religion and neither is my intention to attack a religion so correct and educate me if I'm wrong. But this is what I understand at a basic level.

1) Sita, wife of Lord Rama, was abducted by Ravana and kept in captivity for years.

2) When Sita was finally liberated there were whispers about her being taken advantage of by Ravana while this was not true.

3) Instead of supporting her publicly, Lord Rama held a public chastity and purity trial in order to prove her purity this tying the concept of a woman's honour to this. This is a problem which plagues subcontinental society till today and maybe a result of this. There was no reason for such an exercise to be conducted because she had no control and if there was something like a forced situation then it is clearly not her fault so why should she be punished for it?

4) apparently later Sita was banished from society despite proving her chastity because the whispers and doubts against her from society didn't stop and Lord Rama did not want to be a King whose wife had such allegations on her despite the fact that they were proven to not be true.

Now if the above events are correctly understood it definitely seems problematic for me considering its part of a Hindu sage.

It ties a woman's honour to her chastity and puts the message that if an aggressor can forcefully take advantage of her the woman is 'damaged goods.'

What do posters think? Hopefully we can have a mature conversation about this.

Bump.

With Sati and female infanticide in Hindu societies a common theme would like views on this

 

[Akki malhotra]

Bump.

With Sati and female infanticide in Hindu societies a common theme would like views on this

Ishall we open thread about islam? We will bump those threads then.
There are many plenty of things, can be argued about Islam. Which makes no sense to all non Muslims.
Hinduism well you can't find head and tail of this religion. There is a reason that even thousand of years of invasions, still this religion is thriving and this land give birth to other most peaceful religions of this world such as budhism, sikhism jainism etc etc. Because nobody could find head and tail of this religion so that could not crush this.
Between about rama and sita. Will tell you if you really need to know.

 

[Slog]

Ishall we open thread about islam? We will bump those threads then.
There are many plenty of things, can be argued about Islam. Which makes no sense to all non Muslims.
Hinduism well you can't find head and tail of this religion. There is a reason that even thousand of years of invasions, still this religion is thriving and this land give birth to other most peaceful religions of this world such as budhism, sikhism jainism etc etc. Because nobody could find head and tail of this religion so that could not crush this.
Between about rama and sita. Will tell you if you really need to know.

Can you respond to OP?

Or atleast your interpretation of the events

 

[Akki malhotra]

Bump.

With Sati and female infanticide in Hindu societies a common theme would like views on this

Where did you see sati happening between? You mean to say there are no widows in Indian society. ? You guys still living in 10th century and following same rules of that time. Hinduism has moved on big time. Invasions was a bigger reason of those times for sati, later it became common issue. But it is illegal and has not been followed in bharat since almost a century.

 

[Civil]

Ishall we open thread about islam? We will bump those threads then.
There are many plenty of things, can be argued about Islam. Which makes no sense to all non Muslims.
Hinduism well you can't find head and tail of this religion. There is a reason that even thousand of years of invasions, still this religion is thriving and this land give birth to other most peaceful religions of this world such as budhism, sikhism jainism etc etc. Because nobody could find head and tail of this religion so that could not crush this.
Between about rama and sita. Will tell you if you really need to know.

I agree Hinduism is complex and also constantly evolving. Even if you look at more relatively recent Arya Samaj movement .

For the majority it's peaceful positive parts there are also many many abhorrent practices in it like any religion.

But to your point if we can't find head and tail of the Hindu religion then was it wise voting in Hindu nationalist party that is based on what they claim is this religion's tenets ? Seems like now they also can't find head and tail of governing a country without simply distracting and pandering.

 

[Akki malhotra]

]

I agree Hinduism is complex and also constantly evolving. Even if you look at more relatively recent Arya Samaj movement .

For the majority it's peaceful positive parts there are also many many abhorrent practices in it like any religion.

But to your point if we can't find head and tail of the Hindu religion then was it wise voting in Hindu nationalist party that is based on what they claim is this religion's tenets ? Seems like now they also can't find head and tail of governing a country without simply distracting and pandering.

Out of two nalayaks BJP is best bet. Congress given enough chances in 70 years. Let's try for BJP for some time. It surely can't go worst than congress overall.

 

[Slog]

Where did you see sati happening between? You mean to say there are no widows in Indian society. ? You guys still living in 10th century and following same rules of that time. Hinduism has moved on big time. Invasions was a bigger reason of those times for sati, later it became common issue. But it is illegal and has not been followed in bharat since almost a century.

Where did I say it’s haplening now. But it used to be followed and female infanticide is a current reality.

In any case any thoughts on the OP?