Guest guest Posted December 19, 1999 Report Share Posted December 19, 1999 From Daksha Patel: Whilst conducting research for my University assignment I came across the following information which those on the onlesit may find of interest. Scholars like Alteker, Kapadia and Ludira have maintained that there is not much differentiation between man and woman. Still, we find from the verses in the Rig Vedas that men and women are given a higher and lower status respectively. It is said that a woman has a role to play in ceremonies and sacrifices andthat both men and women are equal in the eyes of religion; it is stated at another place in the same Rig Veda that a son is needed for escaping hell. " Oh God! Protect my son who is to be born. Let my offspring be man and not woman. " (Aatharva Veda 2-3-23) " Oh God! you have given me progeny. Give me a son, woman can be born elsewhere but give my only a boy. " A woman's defeat begins even when she is conceived. The mother who pines for a son becomes disheatened at seeing the birth of a girl. She begs for pardon from the family members as if she has committed a crime. It is written in the Satapatna Brahm and that a woman without a son is an unfortunate being. That shows that her life is virtually linked with a desire for a son. In fret her family life is interwined with the anguish for a son. In Atharva Veda it is affirmed that marriage is meant for offspring only and that too a boy. The description of the woman's character in the Vedas is cruel and heinous. An exhortation is mad to man that he should run away from the friendship of women as a woman is cruel like the wolf. (Rig Veda 6-5-82) The statements that dogs, crows, shudras and women belong to the same class, that sinfulness, deceit and ignorance are naturally inherent in women and hence they should be kept away. It is stated in a verse in Rig Veda (8-3-77) that a woman is bereft of intelligence and is unfit for education. In Atharva Veda a woman is described as property. Manu Smriti (2000BC) prescribes duties and obligations for a woman from childhood to death. According to it, she should be a perpetual minor, to be under the guardianship of someone or the other. The attitude she has to display, and her conduct towards her husband have been laid down in extense in the Smriti. They run thus: " Even if the husband is immoral and debauch and lacks good qualities the wife must still worship him as if here were god himself. (5-154) " It is bounden duty of women to obey and follow the dictates of their husbands (yajnavalkya 1-18) A woman need not perform any Yagna or ceremony or undertake any fast for her salvation. She will attain better life by service to her husband only. (Manu 5-145) The woman who fasts and performs 'vrats' during her husband's life time contributes to the lengthening of her husband's life. The woman who drinks the water with which she has washed her husband's body and feet at sacred springs rivers and seas will inherit best life (atri 136-137) There is no other world to the wife same that of her husband. The wife who has done harm to her husband cannot go to her husband's lok. (place of residence in heaven) after his death. Therefore, women should never cause discontent to their husbands(vasishta 21-24) The king should punish the woman who takes pride in her parental family and thereby shows disobedience towards her husband by throwing her to the dogs to be torn to pieces before the multitude of people (manu 8-871) [a statement] which equates woman with a shudra. Divine water (water used during worship) shall be given to man thrice. It shall be given only once to a woman and shudra. No penance is necessary if a woman or a shudra is killed. There is a widely prevelant misconception that the woman's position was very high during the Vedic period, that there was no 'sati' and that it cam into vogue only dring the puranic period. Verse no 18-3-1 of Atharva veda belies the view. The meaning is clear. " The woman who burns herself on the funeral pyre of her husband reaches her husband. All comforts shall be hers. What she has done is the best course of action " Daksha Patel. Vivekananda Centre Site http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 1999 Report Share Posted December 19, 1999 In a message dated 99-12-19 09:58:22 EST, vivekananda writes: << Whilst conducting research for my University assignment I came across the following information which those on the onlesit may find of interest. Scholars like Alteker, Kapadia and Ludira have maintained that there is not much differentiation between man and woman. Still, we find from the verses in the Rig Vedas that men and women are given a higher and lower status respectively >> There is no distinction of sex in Brahman. It is only when one sees duality that the distinction of sex arises. The duality, Purusha and Prakrati, are brought forth from the same Souce..there cannot be one without the other. Which then is the higher and which the lower? It is only in duality that any limitations are seen, be it on woman or on man. And those limitations reflect the limited mind of the one who places the limitations upon either. Sue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 1999 Report Share Posted December 20, 1999 [in defense of Hinduism - Madhava] This is going to be a quick reply but an in-depth reply is on the anvil (as a dairy of thoughts I am seriously spending time on now a days). I would much anticipate my teacher's reply on this, as she has done more than twenty years of research on Manu and the role of strees and soodras in Hinduism. Most of the times people who criticize the Hinduism, lead their readers in to greater misunderstanding. One should not be carried away with the wrong quotations. I did not mean that the source of the quotes is wrong, but the quoted context is wrong. Each quoted sloka is addressed in a specific context. One need to read the context fully and then try to evaluate it from an birds-eye view, then only one can understand the context of each sloka that is quoted. For example the Atharvaveda Seer cries because he is worried of an off spring who is full of worldly desires. (stree = " s " atva + " r " ajas + " t " amas) The same Atharva veda condemns, people who are strees and completely indulge in worldly activities by ignoring the higher self, it looks down at Shoodras (the humans who are tamasic predominant, which hinders them from understanding the reality). Veda is an esoteric book which is written in a cryptographic language. One needs to have the the key to understand it. Here is a way to understand Hinduism: There is the religious angle and there is a social angle to the Hinduism. The religious angle says that there is the omniscient Brahman who is veiled with trigunas (satva+rajas+tamas) because of which brahman (deva) has become a Human (jeeva). The life that the jeeva lives though is nothing but a struggle to reach back to the absolute state. Then the social angle tries to understand/dissect the struggle that the jeeva undergoes in order to become the deva (God). Since man is not alone in the world, a law is necessary in order to protect the interests of every individual. It is easy to enforce a law if you could classify the possible obstacles. Hence the Seers have categorized the world in to four varnas based on the combination of trigunas. It is because of the combination of trigunas there are four varnas (CATEGORIES - *NOT* CASTES) emerged in the world. Those who can only think (brahmins), Those who can protect the thinkers+treasurers+physical workers (kshatriyas), those who are treasurers (vaisas), those who are working class (shoodras) The same " Manu " who is said to have criticized the Shudras says at one place " janmanA jAyatE soodrO karmanA dvija ucyatE " . A human by birth is a soodra, but by the virtue of the work that he performs, he becomes a dvija (brahmin). The word " soodra " is derived from the word " Soodraka " means fetus. So a person who behaves like a fetus (vegetable!) even after fully grown is called as a soodra. How ever, our ancestors did not look them down, they provided a chance to even imbecile (?) people to participate in the society. Manu has written a book which structures the " social angle " of Hinduism, which in turn leads the humans to purification and puts them in to religious angle. I am *not* disagreeing with the fact that the above system is completely abused later days. I demand you, show me a system in this world which is not abused...! Everybody makes mistakes. There is ethnic discrimination every where in the world. We try to enforce the law in order to protect the interests of everybody. We try to change it, if the law becomes obsolete and gets misused! For example we still have a law in Indian Penal Code which says that a Police Inspector should take his hat off in case he faces any Royal Person or a person who belongs to the royal family! This law is created in the year 1854! There is no more monarchy in India. Still the law is existing in our Indian Penal Code. Why didn't they delete it? is because it takes time to see things going obsolete. HINDUS have realized their mistake, no more any educated Hindu thinks of caste discrimination. Here when I say educated Hindu, I mean --- he who studied both religious and social angles of Hinduism. I remind you, Hinduism is the only religion which allows it followers to freely think and adopt new ideas (anO bhadrO kratavO yaMtu visvataH - Let noble thoughts come from all the sides). Now a days, it is the other way round, in India the government enforces the discrimination on the people, and the politicians abuse it for the sake of political power. The very same people, who wanted to forget their much abused past, are being forced to live with it in present and future also! As long as any government officially sponsors and recognizes the caste certificates, the system gets abused. This is not the fault of Hinduism but the fault of the so-called constitution.... Remind you: Manu's also was a constitution for Hindus long back! Conclusively: Try to understand the religion in its entirety. Try to understand its history, where it was and where it is now, where it would lead. Try to understand how our ancestors tried to implement the religious goal through its social angle. Hinduism has been our culture for times immemorial, let us better understand it, we live like Hindus and we die like Hindus. Hence let us understand it fully. It is better than reading the so-called research findings, which are gravely biased. Regards, Madhava - Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda <ramakrishna > Sunday, December 19, 1999 1:30 AM [ramakrishna] women's rights > " Vivekananda Centre " <vivekananda > > >From Daksha Patel: > > Whilst conducting research for my University assignment I came across the > following information which those on the onlesit may find of interest. > > Scholars like Alteker, Kapadia and Ludira have maintained that there is not > much differentiation between man and woman. Still, we find from the verses > in the Rig Vedas that men and women are given a higher and lower status > respectively. It is said that a woman has a role to play in ceremonies and > sacrifices andthat both men and women are equal in the eyes of religion; it > is stated at another place in the same Rig Veda that a son is needed for > escaping hell. " Oh God! Protect my son who is to be born. Let my offspring > be man and not woman. " (Aatharva Veda 2-3-23) > " Oh God! you have given me progeny. Give me a son, woman can be born > elsewhere but give my only a boy. " A woman's defeat begins even when she is > conceived. The mother who pines for a son becomes disheatened at seeing the > birth of a girl. She begs for pardon from the family members as if she has > committed a crime. > It is written in the Satapatna Brahm and that a woman without a son is an > unfortunate being. That shows that her life is virtually linked with a > desire for a son. In fret her family life is interwined with the anguish for > a son. In Atharva Veda it is affirmed that marriage is meant for offspring > only and that too a boy. The description of the woman's character in the > Vedas is cruel and heinous. An exhortation is mad to man that he should run > away from the friendship of women as a woman is cruel like the wolf. > (Rig Veda 6-5-82) > The statements that dogs, crows, shudras and women belong to the same class, > that sinfulness, deceit and ignorance are naturally inherent in women and > hence they should be kept away. It is stated in a verse in Rig Veda (8-3-77) > that a woman is bereft of intelligence and is unfit for education. > In Atharva Veda a woman is described as property. > Manu Smriti (2000BC) prescribes duties and obligations for a woman from > childhood to death. According to it, she should be a perpetual minor, to be > under the guardianship of someone or the other. The attitude she has to > display, and her conduct towards her husband have been laid down in extense > in the Smriti. They run thus: " Even if the husband is immoral and debauch > and lacks good qualities the wife must still worship him as if here were god > himself. (5-154) " > It is bounden duty of women to obey and follow the dictates of their > husbands (yajnavalkya 1-18) A woman need not perform any Yagna or ceremony > or undertake any fast for her salvation. She will attain better life by > service to her husband only. (Manu 5-145) The woman who fasts and performs > 'vrats' during her husband's life time contributes to the lengthening of her > husband's life. The woman who drinks the water with which she has washed her > husband's body and feet at sacred springs rivers and seas will inherit best > life (atri 136-137) > There is no other world to the wife same that of her husband. The wife who > has done harm to her husband cannot go to her husband's lok. (place of > residence in heaven) after his death. Therefore, women should never cause > discontent to their husbands(vasishta 21-24) The king should punish the > woman who takes pride in her parental family and thereby shows disobedience > towards her husband by throwing her to the dogs to be torn to pieces before > the multitude of people (manu 8-871) > [a statement] which equates woman with a shudra. Divine water (water used > during worship) shall be given to man thrice. It shall be given only once to > a woman and shudra. No penance is necessary if a woman or a shudra is > killed. > > There is a widely prevelant misconception that the woman's position was very > high during the Vedic period, that there was no 'sati' and that it cam into > vogue only dring the puranic period. Verse no 18-3-1 of Atharva veda belies > the view. The meaning is clear. " The woman who burns herself on the funeral > pyre of her husband reaches her husband. All comforts shall be hers. What > she has done is the best course of action " > > Daksha Patel. > > Vivekananda Centre Site > http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda > > > Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah > Vivekananda Centre London > http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda/ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 1999 Report Share Posted December 21, 1999 Dear Madhava That was great Tanmoy Madhava K Turumella <madhava ramakrishna <ramakrishna > Cc: advaitin <advaitin > Tuesday, December 21, 1999 10:20 AM Re: [ramakrishna] women's rights > " Madhava K Turumella " <madhava > >[in defense of Hinduism - Madhava] > >This is going to be a quick reply but an in-depth reply is on the anvil (as >a dairy of thoughts I am seriously spending time on now a days). I would >much anticipate my teacher's reply on this, as she has done more than twenty >years of research on Manu and the role of strees and soodras in Hinduism. > >Most of the times people who criticize the Hinduism, lead their readers in >to greater misunderstanding. One should not be carried away with the wrong >quotations. I did not mean that the source of the quotes is wrong, but the >quoted context is wrong. Each quoted sloka is addressed in a specific >context. One need to read the context fully and then try to evaluate it >from an birds-eye view, then only one can understand the context of each >sloka that is quoted. > >For example the Atharvaveda Seer cries because he is worried of an off >spring who is full of worldly desires. (stree = " s " atva + " r " ajas + > " t " amas) The same Atharva veda condemns, people who are strees and >completely indulge in worldly activities by ignoring the higher self, it >looks down at Shoodras (the humans who are tamasic predominant, which >hinders them from understanding the reality). Veda is an esoteric book >which is written in a cryptographic language. One needs to have the the key >to understand it. > >Here is a way to understand Hinduism: > >There is the religious angle and there is a social angle to the Hinduism. >The religious angle says that there is the omniscient Brahman who is veiled >with trigunas (satva+rajas+tamas) because of which brahman (deva) has become >a Human (jeeva). >The life that the jeeva lives though is nothing but a struggle to reach back >to the absolute state. > >Then the social angle tries to understand/dissect the struggle that the >jeeva undergoes in order to become the deva (God). Since man is not alone >in the world, a law is necessary in order to protect the interests of every >individual. It is easy to enforce a law if you could classify the possible >obstacles. Hence the Seers have categorized the world in to four varnas >based on the combination of trigunas. It is because of the combination of >trigunas there are four varnas (CATEGORIES - *NOT* CASTES) emerged in the >world. Those who can only think (brahmins), Those who can protect the >thinkers+treasurers+physical workers (kshatriyas), those who are treasurers >(vaisas), those who are working class (shoodras) > >The same " Manu " who is said to have criticized the Shudras says at one place > " janmanA jAyatE soodrO karmanA dvija ucyatE " . A human by birth is a soodra, >but by the virtue of the work that he performs, he becomes a dvija >(brahmin). The word " soodra " is derived from the word " Soodraka " means >fetus. So a person who behaves like a fetus (vegetable!) even after fully >grown is called as a soodra. How ever, our ancestors did not look them >down, they provided a chance to even imbecile (?) people to participate in >the society. > >Manu has written a book which structures the " social angle " of Hinduism, >which in turn leads the humans to purification and puts them in to religious >angle. > >I am *not* disagreeing with the fact that the above system is completely >abused later days. I demand you, show me a system in this world which is >not abused...! Everybody makes mistakes. There is ethnic discrimination >every where in the world. We try to enforce the law in order to protect the >interests of everybody. We try to change it, if the law becomes obsolete >and gets misused! > >For example we still have a law in Indian Penal Code which says that a >Police Inspector should take his hat off in case he faces any Royal Person >or a person who belongs to the royal family! This law is created in the >year 1854! There is no more monarchy in India. Still the law is existing >in our Indian Penal Code. Why didn't they delete it? is because it takes >time to see things going obsolete. HINDUS have realized their mistake, no >more any educated Hindu thinks of caste discrimination. Here when I say >educated Hindu, I mean --- he who studied both religious and social angles >of Hinduism. I remind you, Hinduism is the only religion which allows it >followers to freely think and adopt new ideas (anO bhadrO kratavO yaMtu >visvataH - Let noble thoughts come from all the sides). > >Now a days, it is the other way round, in India the government enforces the >discrimination on the people, and the politicians abuse it for the sake of >political power. The very same people, who wanted to forget their much >abused past, are being forced to live with it in present and future also! >As long as any government officially sponsors and recognizes the caste >certificates, the system gets abused. This is not the fault of Hinduism but >the fault of the so-called constitution.... Remind you: Manu's also was a >constitution for Hindus long back! > >Conclusively: Try to understand the religion in its entirety. Try to >understand its history, where it was and where it is now, where it would >lead. Try to understand how our ancestors tried to implement the religious >goal through its social angle. Hinduism has been our culture for times >immemorial, let us better understand it, we live like Hindus and we die like >Hindus. Hence let us understand it fully. It is better than reading the >so-called research findings, which are gravely biased. > >Regards, >Madhava > > >- >Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda ><ramakrishna > >Sunday, December 19, 1999 1:30 AM >[ramakrishna] women's rights > > >> " Vivekananda Centre " <vivekananda >> >> >From Daksha Patel: >> >> Whilst conducting research for my University assignment I came across the >> following information which those on the onlesit may find of interest. >> >> Scholars like Alteker, Kapadia and Ludira have maintained that there is >not >> much differentiation between man and woman. Still, we find from the verses >> in the Rig Vedas that men and women are given a higher and lower status >> respectively. It is said that a woman has a role to play in ceremonies and >> sacrifices andthat both men and women are equal in the eyes of religion; >it >> is stated at another place in the same Rig Veda that a son is needed for >> escaping hell. " Oh God! Protect my son who is to be born. Let my offspring >> be man and not woman. " (Aatharva Veda 2-3-23) >> " Oh God! you have given me progeny. Give me a son, woman can be born >> elsewhere but give my only a boy. " A woman's defeat begins even when she >is >> conceived. The mother who pines for a son becomes disheatened at seeing >the >> birth of a girl. She begs for pardon from the family members as if she has >> committed a crime. >> It is written in the Satapatna Brahm and that a woman without a son is an >> unfortunate being. That shows that her life is virtually linked with a >> desire for a son. In fret her family life is interwined with the anguish >for >> a son. In Atharva Veda it is affirmed that marriage is meant for offspring >> only and that too a boy. The description of the woman's character in the >> Vedas is cruel and heinous. An exhortation is mad to man that he should >run >> away from the friendship of women as a woman is cruel like the wolf. >> (Rig Veda 6-5-82) >> The statements that dogs, crows, shudras and women belong to the same >class, >> that sinfulness, deceit and ignorance are naturally inherent in women and >> hence they should be kept away. It is stated in a verse in Rig Veda >(8-3-77) >> that a woman is bereft of intelligence and is unfit for education. >> In Atharva Veda a woman is described as property. >> Manu Smriti (2000BC) prescribes duties and obligations for a woman from >> childhood to death. According to it, she should be a perpetual minor, to >be >> under the guardianship of someone or the other. The attitude she has to >> display, and her conduct towards her husband have been laid down in >extense >> in the Smriti. They run thus: " Even if the husband is immoral and debauch >> and lacks good qualities the wife must still worship him as if here were >god >> himself. (5-154) " >> It is bounden duty of women to obey and follow the dictates of their >> husbands (yajnavalkya 1-18) A woman need not perform any Yagna or ceremony >> or undertake any fast for her salvation. She will attain better life by >> service to her husband only. (Manu 5-145) The woman who fasts and performs >> 'vrats' during her husband's life time contributes to the lengthening of >her >> husband's life. The woman who drinks the water with which she has washed >her >> husband's body and feet at sacred springs rivers and seas will inherit >best >> life (atri 136-137) >> There is no other world to the wife same that of her husband. The wife who >> has done harm to her husband cannot go to her husband's lok. (place of >> residence in heaven) after his death. Therefore, women should never cause >> discontent to their husbands(vasishta 21-24) The king should punish the >> woman who takes pride in her parental family and thereby shows >disobedience >> towards her husband by throwing her to the dogs to be torn to pieces >before >> the multitude of people (manu 8-871) >> [a statement] which equates woman with a shudra. Divine water (water used >> during worship) shall be given to man thrice. It shall be given only once >to >> a woman and shudra. No penance is necessary if a woman or a shudra is >> killed. >> >> There is a widely prevelant misconception that the woman's position was >very >> high during the Vedic period, that there was no 'sati' and that it cam >into >> vogue only dring the puranic period. Verse no 18-3-1 of Atharva veda >belies >> the view. The meaning is clear. " The woman who burns herself on the >funeral >> pyre of her husband reaches her husband. All comforts shall be hers. What >> she has done is the best course of action " >> >> Daksha Patel. >> >> Vivekananda Centre Site >> http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda >> >> > Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah >> Vivekananda Centre London >> http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda/ >> > >>Sri Ramakrishnaye Namah >Vivekananda Centre London >http://www.btinternet.com/~vivekananda/ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.