Priyanka Chopra gets flak for ‘Hindu terror’ plot in Quantico

[Moochad]

6 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Friendly advice, do yourself a favor, and read the entire post at once instead of replying one by one to each statement, 

 

you yourself posted this

regarding what Ranga said, so why waste time with a padosi who literally posted some BS from some Afro-Dalit movement propaganda page? 

 

 

 

 

I was going to do just that, but then this person tried to psychoanalyze me, and I got a bit annoyed 

 

This is absolutely bizarre, posting a million unrelated quotes on Shudras from 1 smriti text to claim that Dalits were murdered and raped for 2000 years. 

 

 

[Tibarn]

5 minutes ago, Moochad said:

I was going to do just that, but then this person tried to psychoanalyze me, and I got a bit annoyed 

 

This is absolutely bizarre, posting a million unrelated quotes on Shudras from 1 smriti text to claim that Dalits were murdered and raped for 2000 years. 

 

 

Don't know that Dar guy, but even some yindoos don't know that smritis aren't the same as shrutis and that smritis are usually with multiple interpretations and written different ways. People acting like smriti are like the Koran as a divine revelation   

[Moochad]

7 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Don't know that Dar guy, but even some yindoos don't know that smritis aren't the same as shrutis and that smritis are usually with multiple interpretations and written different ways. People acting like smriti are like the Koran as a divine revelation   

My favorite is that some pick and choose what they want to from that one smriti, manu smriti, and extrapolate whatever they want from it... not even knowing that most Hindus are either Vishnu/Shiva/Mata followers, so they have little need to even need the smritis

 

there is one part of the manu smriti that says something along the lines of "upper castes will not live in a country ruled by a Shudra king"

 

so we are to believe that all the Brahmins left the entirety of India the moment Mauryan empire came into being because Chandragupta and Ashoka were Shudras and they united more or less the entirety of what is considered Bharat. I guess all the Brahmins went to China and then came back when some Kshatriya came to power somewhere and later when Shivaji/Shambji were kings they ran away from Maharashtra to gods know where and then came back when the Peshwas were in charge .  

 

[Tibarn]

1 minute ago, Moochad said:

My favorite is that some pick and choose what they want to from that one smriti, manu smriti, and extrapolate whatever they want from it... not even knowing that most Hindus are either Vishnu/Shiva/Mata followers, so they have little need to even need the smritis

 

there is one part of the manu smriti that says something along the lines of "upper castes will not live in a country ruled by a Shudra king"

 

so we are to believe that all the Brahmins left the entirety of India the moment Mauryan empire came into being because Chandragupta and Ashoka were Shudras and they united more or less the entirety of what is considered Bharat. I guess all the Brahmins went to China and then came back when some Kshatriya came to power somewhere and later when Shivaji/Shambji were kings they ran away from Maharashtra to gods know where and then came back when the Peshwas were in charge .  

 

Yeh sab chodd do, at least now I know that a sudroid like me is African 

 

My hair is already curly, maybe I should try to grow an afro now

[Moochad]

1 minute ago, Tibarn said:

Yeh sab chodd do, at least now I know that a sudroid like me is African 

 

My hair is already curly, maybe I should try to grow an afro now

tu American citizenship lele, tereko quota millega 

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Moochad said:

Don't deflect from your inability to provide evidence for your/their fantastic claims by trying to psychoanalyze me, I have enough experience in psychiatry myself, and I can do it to you as well:

You want to seek refuge in your own flawed understanding of Hinduism and humanity assuming you have discovered some unique truth that no one else already has considered. This derives from your own insecure position in your own society with who you consider to be the dominant powers of it, which you are projecting onto people you neither have any experience with nor know to any significant level, displaying a lazy thinking of seeing patterns where they don't exist and creating false stereotypes to make yourself appear intellectual. See, there is a psychoanalysis of you,

 

now stop with the personal comments and provide sources for your claims

 

I haven't neglected anything, I asked for proof of everything you claimed, which you have neglected...  

 

You created a strawman argument implying that I  said there was no discrimination of dalits, when no one has said that, its obvious there has been discrimination, but apparently you don't understand that rape, murder, etc aren't the same thing as discrimination, 

 

You  have to reread my post. I didn't claim about murder or rape of Dalits.
I didn't read much about the history of India, but everywhere it has been written that Dalits were hated, humiliated, discriminated. 

I pointed out that life of Dalits was made even worse than slaves. 

I even today still see this same hatred among the high caste Hindus where they still consider Dalits so much untouchable that this makes their status even worse than the slaves in Islam. And google is witness to it. 

It is a hard fact, but reality, irrespective of you accept it or try to deny it by making excuses. 

 

And I am neither a psychiatrist, nor an intellectual. I am a normal person with normal intelligence, but it is enough to see the plight of Dalits since centuries in India. 

 

Quote

Vedas aren't judged by what a Pakistani atheist deems valuable or not valuable, your opinions are yours to have, but don't matter in any quantifiable manner to Hindus...I can say your atheism is so weak that it is dying out globally and produced a number of the biggest mass murders in the history of humanity including Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot;

You are fully free to criticize the atheism and bring forward your opinion and you are very much welcome. We will discuss about Mao, Stalin and whatever criticism you have in new thread. 

 

Similarly, it is my right to express my honest opinions about the ancient texts, which hardly anyone understands today properly and which are no more helpful to the humanity today, and whose biggest failure was to stop the evil of caste system. 

 

I am a big fan of Buddha, but I even don't agree with the ancient practices of Buddhism which are obsolete today. But at least Buddha's teachings were against the caste system and for that I prefer Buddha above others in India. 

 

Quote

Here is another anecdote

http://zeenews.india.com/news/gujarat/narendra-modi-govt-for-dalits-as-priests_830975.html

Gujarat government promotes dalit priests 

Good move if intended with true heart for the sake of humanity and not for the politics. 

Nevertheless, please accept it that it is too little. And in no way it could prevent the higher caste Hindus from the blame of humiliating the Dalits for centuries. 

 

Quote

There are lower castes who have hatred and say/do bigoted, hateful things to upper castes

Read about the Dravidian movement and there hatred for Brahmins and anti-Brahmin violence in Tamil Nadu or the politicians Kanshi Ram/Mayawati in Uttar Pradesh also read @Tibarn post on dalit issue

You are quick to protest when someone hurts you 1%, but it is very easy for you to digest the 99% plight of others from your hands. 
Even slaves in whole world rebelled for not having equal rights. And here we have Dalits which were humiliated and treated even worse than the slaves. If they rebelled, then it is understandable. 

 

Quote

So you admit you know little of Hindu "holy texts", yet you feel the need to lecture others acting as if we don't read our own texts? Or, are you so uninformed on Hinduism to think that it is a text based religion?  

Plights of Dalits for centuries at the hands of high caste Hindus is so much obvious that one does not have to be an authority in Hindu Texts to know about it. 

Problem is this that you are trying to deny or belittle this hard reality by making excuses. 

 

Quote

Related to the website you linked to claims that Aryans invaded India (disproven), and that the "caste system" is racial in origin calling shudras as shudroids and claiming they were black ie Africans.  It is basically a Dravidianist propaganda piece or related to the Afro-Dalit movement in the West. 

I didn't present the Dravidianist claims.

But I presented the references provided by them.

And these references are from one of the most important book of Hinduism i.e. Manusmiriti which deals with "law of all the social classes", and considered to be the words of Brahma. 

 

Quote

Another unsourced statement, which also contradicts your own claims. Gau-hatya, killing of cows, is one of the prime sins in Hinduism, they are referred to as Aghnya.  Even death penalty has been used for Gau-hatya. So you just posted something that killing Sudras is one of the greatest crimes in Hinduism and can lead to death penalty... 

May I request you to please first exactly quote the reference before commenting. I don't know about which reference you are talking about and what exactly it states. 
 
All that I know is this that even Brahmins were killing and eating the cow till the time of Ashoka and even later on. It were the Buddhist who brought vegetarianism in India. 
 

Quote

1 of the references literally states that penance will be done for the murder of a Shudra. 

Once again, you have to first exactly quote the reference before commenting. 
And your comment here making ZERO sense. 

Here is the direct reference from Manusmriti (LINK):

 

मार्जारनकुलौ हत्वा चाषं मण्डूकमेव च । 
श्वगोधौलूककाकांश्च शूद्रहत्याव्रतं चरेत् ॥ १३१ ॥

Translation:

Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an iguana, an owl and a crow,—he shall perform the penance of the ‘Śūdra-killer.’—(131)

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 11.131-132)

Gautama (22-19).—‘For injuring a frog, an ichneumon, a crow, a chameleon, a musk-rat, a mouse or a dog (the penance is the same as that for the murder of a Vaiśya).’

Baudhāyana (1.19.6).—‘For killing a flamingo, a Bhāsa bird, a peacock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a Pracetaka, a crow, an owl, a frog, a musk-rat, a dog, a Babhru, a common ichneumon, and so forth, the offender shall pay the same fine as for the killing of a Śūdra.’

Āpastamba (1.25.13).—‘If a crow, a chameleon, a pea-cock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a swan, the vulture called Bhāsa, a frog, an ichneumon, a musk-rat, or a dog has been killed, then the offender should perform the same penance as that for killing a Śūdra.’

Vaṣhiṣṭha (21.24).—‘Having slain a dog, a cat, an ichneumon, a snake, a frog, or a rat,—one shall perform the Kṛcchra penance of twelve days’ duration, and also give something to a Brāhmaṇa.’

Viṣṇu (50.30-32).—‘If he has intentionally killed a dog, he should fast for three days. If he has unintentionally killed a mouse, or a cat, or an ichneumon, or a frog, or a Duṇḍubha snake, or a large serpent—he must fast for one day, and on the next day give a dish of milk, sesamum and rice mixed together to a Brāhmaṇa and give him an iron hoe as his fee: If he has unintentionally killed an iguana, or an owl, or a crow, or a fish, he must fast for three days.’

 

My Comments:

1. You are only trying to twist the Reality. 

 

2. Reality is this that killing of low caste people caused no punishment except for few day of fasting and giving something to Brahmana. 

 

I don't know how you could still keep on discussing this issue with me. 

Even in Islam killing of a slave means half the price of the blood of a free man.

 

But here Hindu Sacred Text is presenting a picture which is even worse than Islam. 

I just hope you could take out the prejudice, and start giving Humanity preference upon all others like religion and race and nationalism etc. 

 

Quote

All this of Shudras being denied education was disproven earlier in this thread itself by @Tibarn in his earlier post where he references a book the Beautiful Tree which quotes the British who themselves observed schools were filled with Shudras, etc

So sad that you once again twisting the facts. 

The talk was not about the ERA of the British who opened the gates of education to the lower caste people, or even the Mughal era which brought some relief to the lower caste people,  but we were talking about the practices of the high caste Hindus in the earlier centuries, where they prohibited the Dalits to even hear the sacred Hindu texts. 

PS: In schools of British Era, Dalits were not taking the religious education of sacred Hindu Books. 

 

Quote

The idea that Shudras were discriminated against as propagated by you is disproven by the evidence from ancient and medieval India where numerous Shudra dynasties were formed, including the Mauryas, Marathas, Reddys, and Jats

What about the Dalits? 

And did the Brahmins supported the Shudras to take the power? 

If Brahmins didn't support them, and the Shudras themselves took the power in their hands, then it does not go in the credit of Hindu sacred texts, which does not support the lower castes, and indeed discriminate against them. 
 

Edited June 22, 2018 by Alam_dar

[Tibarn]

1 minute ago, Moochad said:

tu American citizenship lele, tereko quota millega 

saala Bharat me mera jaisa Sudroid ko reservation nahi mila, aur Amreeka ja kar African banna padega 

 

yeh Brahmano ka saajish hai  

 

 

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

so why waste time with a padosi who literally posted some BS from some Afro-Dalit movement propaganda page? 

I wish one day people stop seeing other with the lens of nationality and religion. 

We are Human Beings first and should behave like this. 

But if you think it is a tool in your hands to discredit my opinion, then it is your own fate. 

Edited June 22, 2018 by Alam_dar

[Alam_dar]

38 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Don't know that Dar guy, but even some yindoos don't know that smritis aren't the same as shrutis and that smritis are usually with multiple interpretations and written different ways. People acting like smriti are like the Koran as a divine revelation   

For me Quran is the deception of Muhamad, and my opinion about Hindu texts is also not different. 

We have much better text in form of Indian Constitution, which is based upon the Humanity and not the caste system. 
Better believe in Indian constitution with true hearts. 

Unfortunately, Sangh Prawar still believe in the ancient texts more than the Indian Constitution, which is unfortunate. 

[Tibarn]

2 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

I wish one day people stop seeing other with the lens of nationality and religion. 

We are Human Beings first and should behave like this. 

But if you think it is a tool in your hands to discredit my opinion, then it is your own fate. 

You are wishing that only. Nationalism and Religion are here to stay, in my opinion. The only question is which nations and which religions. 

 

And you are going to decide what human beings behave like? Sorry that's not how this works. 

 

I didn't discredit your opinion, you did that yourself with your ignorant use of a propaganda site to push your agenda. If you would've used texts right from the beginning, namely the manu smriti, you wouldn't have made yourself look discredited. If you don't even understand the basics of valid and invalid sources in general, forget about sources in the context of Hinduism, your views on Hinduism/its philosophy are useless on any level, in my opinion.   

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

For me Quran is the deception of Muhamad, and my opinion about Hindu texts is also not different.

You can think whatever you want, no one on here told you that you have to respect either. Only you are evangelizing others, first @Moochad and now me on things you yourself admit you don't know much about ie Hinduism in general and Indian history by extension. 

 

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

We have much better text in form of Indian Constitution, which is based upon the Humanity and not the caste system. 

 Who decides what is based on Humanity? You? Someone else? How do you objectively quantify what is better or worse, based on vague terms like Humanity? 

 

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

Better believe in Indian constitution with true hearts. 

Why? 

 

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

Unfortunately, Sangh Prawar still believe in the ancient texts more than the Indian Constitution, which is unfortunate. 

Lol, if you are trying to imply I am part of the Sangh Parivaar then you are wrong, but I would any day join them over whoever Pakistanis support. 

 

If you think you/your co-travelers are defenders of the Indian constitution that is laughable, especially in comparison to the Sangh Parivaar, which actually fought to restore the constitution the only time it was actually under threat, during the Emergency.  

 

Edited June 22, 2018 by Tibarn

[Moochad]

14 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

 

You  have to reread my post. I didn't claim about murder or rape of Dalits.
I didn't read much about the history of India, but everywhere it has been written that Dalits were hated, humiliated, discriminated. 

I pointed out that life of Dalits was made even worse than slaves. 

I even today still see this same hatred among the high caste Hindus where they still consider Dalits so much untouchable that this makes their status even worse than the slaves in Islam. And google is witness to it. 

It is a hard fact, but reality, irrespective of you accept it or try to deny it by making excuses. 

 

And I am neither a psychiatrist, nor an intellectual. I am a normal person with normal intelligence, but it is enough to see the plight of Dalits since centuries in India. 

 

You are fully free to criticize the atheism and bring forward your opinion and you are very much welcome. We will discuss about Mao, Stalin and whatever criticism you have in new thread. 

 

Similarly, it is my right to express my honest opinions about the ancient texts, which hardly anyone understands today properly and which are no more helpful to the humanity today, and whose biggest failure was to stop the evil of caste system. 

 

I am a big fan of Buddha, but I even don't agree with the ancient practices of Buddhism which are obsolete today. But at least Buddha's teachings were against the caste system and for that I prefer Buddha above others in India. 

 

Good move if intended with true heart for the sake of humanity and not for the politics. 

Nevertheless, please accept it that it is too little. And in no way it could prevent the higher caste Hindus from the blame of humiliating the Dalits for centuries. 

 

You are quick to protest when someone hurts you 1%, but it is very easy for you to digest the 99% plight of others from your hands. 
Even slaves in whole world rebelled for not having equal rights. And here we have Dalits which were humiliated and treated even worse than the slaves. If they rebelled, then it is understandable. 

 

Plights of Dalits for centuries at the hands of high caste Hindus is so much obvious that one does not have to be an authority in Hindu Texts to know about it. 

Problem is this that you are trying to deny or belittle this hard reality by making excuses. 

 

I didn't present the Dravidianist claims.

But I presented the references provided by them.

And these references are from one of the most important book of Hinduism i.e. Manusmiriti which deals with "law of all the social classes", and considered to be the words of Brahma. 

 

May I request you to please first exactly quote the reference before commenting. I don't know about which reference you are talking about and what exactly it states. 
 
All that I know is this that even Brahmins were killing and eating the cow till the time of Ashoka and even later on. It were the Buddhist who brought vegetarianism in India. 
 

Once again, you have to first exactly quote the reference before commenting. 
And your comment here making ZERO sense. 

Here is the direct reference from Manusmriti (LINK):

 

मार्जारनकुलौ हत्वा चाषं मण्डूकमेव च । 
श्वगोधौलूककाकांश्च शूद्रहत्याव्रतं चरेत् ॥ १३१ ॥

Translation:

Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an iguana, an owl and a crow,—he shall perform the penance of the ‘Śūdra-killer.’—(131)

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 11.131-132)

Gautama (22-19).—‘For injuring a frog, an ichneumon, a crow, a chameleon, a musk-rat, a mouse or a dog (the penance is the same as that for the murder of a Vaiśya).’

Baudhāyana (1.19.6).—‘For killing a flamingo, a Bhāsa bird, a peacock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a Pracetaka, a crow, an owl, a frog, a musk-rat, a dog, a Babhru, a common ichneumon, and so forth, the offender shall pay the same fine as for the killing of a Śūdra.’

Āpastamba (1.25.13).—‘If a crow, a chameleon, a pea-cock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a swan, the vulture called Bhāsa, a frog, an ichneumon, a musk-rat, or a dog has been killed, then the offender should perform the same penance as that for killing a Śūdra.’

Vaṣhiṣṭha (21.24).—‘Having slain a dog, a cat, an ichneumon, a snake, a frog, or a rat,—one shall perform the Kṛcchra penance of twelve days’ duration, and also give something to a Brāhmaṇa.’

Viṣṇu (50.30-32).—‘If he has intentionally killed a dog, he should fast for three days. If he has unintentionally killed a mouse, or a cat, or an ichneumon, or a frog, or a Duṇḍubha snake, or a large serpent—he must fast for one day, and on the next day give a dish of milk, sesamum and rice mixed together to a Brāhmaṇa and give him an iron hoe as his fee: If he has unintentionally killed an iguana, or an owl, or a crow, or a fish, he must fast for three days.’

 

My Comments:

1. You are only trying to twist the Reality. 

 

2. Reality is this that killing of low caste people caused no punishment except for few day of fasting and giving something to Brahmana. 

 

I don't know how you could still keep on discussing this issue with me. 

Even in Islam killing of a slave means half the price of the blood of a free man.

 

But here Hindu Sacred Text is presenting a picture which is even worse than Islam. 

I just hope you could take out the prejudice, and start giving Humanity preference upon all others like religion and race and nationalism etc. 

 

So sad that you once again twisting the facts. 

The talk was not about the ERA of the British who opened the gates of education to the lower caste people, or even the Mughal era which brought some relief to the lower caste people,  but we were talking about the practices of the high caste Hindus in the earlier centuries, where they prohibited the Dalits to even hear the sacred Hindu texts. 

PS: In schools of British Era, Dalits were not taking the religious education of sacred Hindu Books. 

 

What about the Dalits? 

And did the Brahmins supported the Shudras to take the power? 

If Brahmins didn't support them, and the Shudras themselves took the power in their hands, then it does not go in the credit of Hindu sacred texts, which does not support the lower castes, and indeed discriminate against them. 
 

 

yaar I'm not responding to all that, you are writing too much to respond to deflecting from the fact that you have not provided sources for your original claims 

 

you specifically replied to a post where I said there was no evidence of Hindus murdering and raping dalits for 2000 years, which means you were either 1) specifically contradicting that or 2) just giving an unsolicited lecture

 

if the 1st you failed to provide evidence, to support that stand

 

if the 2nd then you are just lecturing me unsolicited, just like an Islamist  

 

you haven't proven this series of claims:

Quote

You are quoting an Exceptional case of one person. 

 

Prove it, I and @Tibarn have listed numerous Dalits and Shudras who achieved the highest position:

Shivaji (Shudra)

Surajmal (Shudra)

Maharaja Suheldev Pasi (Dalit)

Chandragupta Maurya (Shudra)

Prolaya Vema Reddy (Shudra)

Sant Ravidas(Dalit)

Sage Valmiki(Dalit or Shudra, there is debate)

 

11 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

But sad and brutal reality is this that they didn't considered Dalits as Human Beings.

Where is the evidence that Brahmins didn't consider Dalits human beings?

 

You have only given references to Shudras, and saying someone is unequal doesn't mean you don't think they are human beings that is your extrapolation. Prove it.

 

Quote

So, hindu or no hindu, what difference is it going to make when they were not even Human Beings for upper caste Hindus?

Prove it, give a source where they say Dalits are not humans, if you can't quit spamming the thread with your propaganda. Seeing someone unequal does not mean you don't see someone as human.

 

Quote

You say they were considered Hindu. But were they allowed to enter the Mandirs? Or Mandirs became filthy due to their presence?

Do you have proof that Dalits were never allowed in temples? Do you have a textual reference which prohibits them from temples across all of India, in all 4 major forms of Hinduism: Vedic/Shaivite/Vaishnavite/Mata-derived?  

 

Source that no Dalit was even allowed in any Mandir over the 5-8000 year history of Hinduism?

 

Quote

But were they allowed to touch and read the holy Hindu Books? Or were they beaten for entering the Mandirs and touching and reading the holy books?

Again, I want a source which said Dalits weren't allowed to read Holy books of Hindus. I already gave examples of Dalits: Sant Ravidas a Dalit who was considered the Guru of Shivaji and was honored by the Brahmins of Banaras and bowed down to by them. There is also Sage Valmiki who wrote the definitive version of the Ramayana

 

Regarding one thing you stated, Brahmins have indeed supported Shudras to become kings, 2 examples The Mauryan dynasty and Chandragupta and the Marathas under Shivaji were both supported by Brahmins 

 

No there is an entire book called Myth of Beef in Vedas by an organization called Agniveer. 

[Moochad]

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

saala Bharat me mera jaisa Sudroid ko reservation nahi mila, aur Amreeka ja kar African banna padega 

 

yeh Brahmano ka saajish hai  

 

 

Bas yaar mere sone ka samay aagaya hai, rolayega kya?

[Tibarn]

15 minutes ago, Moochad said:

yaar I'm not responding to all that, you are writing too much to respond to deflecting from the fact that you have not provided sources for your original claims 

 

you specifically replied to a post where I said there was no evidence of Hindus murdering and raping dalits for 2000 years, which means you were either 1) specifically contradicting that or 2) just giving an unsolicited lecture

 

if the 1st you failed to provide evidence, to support that stand

 

if the 2nd then you are just lecturing me unsolicited, just like an Islamist  

 

you haven't proven this series of claims:

 

Prove it, I and @Tibarn have listed numerous Dalits and Shudras who achieved the highest position:

Shivaji (Shudra)

Surajmal (Shudra)

Maharaja Suheldev Pasi (Dalit)

Chandragupta Maurya (Shudra)

Prolaya Vema Reddy (Shudra)

Sant Ravidas(Dalit)

Sage Valmiki(Dalit or Shudra, there is debate)

 

Where is the evidence that Brahmins didn't consider Dalits human beings?

 

You have only given references to Shudras, and saying someone is unequal doesn't mean you don't think they are human beings that is your extrapolation. Prove it.

 

Prove it, give a source where they say Dalits are not humans, if you can't quit spamming the thread with your propaganda. Seeing someone unequal does not mean you don't see someone as human.

 

Do you have proof that Dalits were never allowed in temples? Do you have a textual reference which prohibits them from temples across all of India, in all 4 major forms of Hinduism: Vedic/Shaivite/Vaishnavite/Mata-derived?  

 

Source that no Dalit was even allowed in any Mandir over the 5-8000 year history of Hinduism?

 

Again, I want a source which said Dalits weren't allowed to read Holy books of Hindus. I already gave examples of Dalits: Sant Ravidas a Dalit who was considered the Guru of Shivaji and was honored by the Brahmins of Banaras and bowed down to by them. There is also Sage Valmiki who wrote the definitive version of the Ramayana

 

Regarding one thing you stated, Brahmins have indeed supported Shudras to become kings, 2 examples The Mauryan dynasty and Chandragupta and the Marathas under Shivaji were both supported by Brahmins 

 

No there is an entire book called Myth of Beef in Vedas by an organization called Agniveer. 

ab yeh Dharampal ko joottha ke raha he 

 

For anyone who cares, the British accounts show the observations of the British themselves who state that native schools are filled with people of lower castes, and the lower castes themselves are oftentimes teachers in the schools themselves.

 

The book is called the Beautiful Tree

Edited June 22, 2018 by Tibarn

[Alam_dar]

12 hours ago, Tibarn said:

You are wishing that only. Nationalism and Religion are here to stay, in my opinion. The only question is which nations and which religions. 

I still hope that one day Humanity comes first, and even if nationalism (Chauvinism) and religion survive at the hands of science and knowledge, then still they become weaker enough to cause any harm to the humanity. 

Quote

 

And you are going to decide what human beings behave like? Sorry that's not how this works. 

No, not I am.

But it is the humanity in you which will always guide you to the correct path.

Just don't let the humanity be suppressed by the religion or nationalism.  

Quote

 

I didn't discredit your opinion, you did that yourself with your ignorant use of a propaganda site to push your agenda. If you would've used texts right from the beginning, namely the manu smriti, you wouldn't have made yourself look discredited.

Problem is you people are targeting me. 
I am no one. 
I request you to concentrate on the subject and try to do Justice. 

I already posted one Reference DIRECTLY from the Manusmriti.
But what happened?
Neither you, nor @Moochad even touched it. 

This is special state of mind, where even if Ram himself comes down from the heavens and tell you these problems in the Hindu religious scripts, still you are going to deny Ram himself. 

 

This one reference is enough to leave religion, if one really starts thinking independently. If Muslims would have been practising it, then for you it would have become a non-forgiveable crime. But since it has been practised by Hindus, then you are not even ready to blame the sacred Hindu texts for being discriminatory. 

Quote

 

If you don't even understand the basics of valid and invalid sources in general, forget about sources in the context of Hinduism, your views on Hinduism/its philosophy are useless on any level, in my opinion.   

What is difficult in understanding the discrimination and humiliation of humanity in these religious texts? 

I once again tell you, only one reference is enough. 
And here we have full Manusmriti full of such discriminations, here we have millions of Dalits being humiliated for centuries. But you still sticking to such philosophy while you were born in a Hindu family. 

Quote

 Who decides what is based on Humanity? You? Someone else?

Humanity in you itself decides what is right and what is wrong. 
Humanity is crying in you that such discrimination by the religious texts is totally against it. But for the sake of religion, the voice of humanity has been strangled. 

 

Quote

How do you objectively quantify what is better or worse, based on vague terms like Humanity? 

Humanity is absolutely not vague. 
One only have to listen to it 

The things which are really VAGUE are Allah, God and Bhagwan. 

And it is vague if really any Quran or Bible or Vedas ever came from any Allah, God or Bhagwan, or they were the human writings. 

 

Quote

If you think you/your co-travelers are defenders of the Indian constitution that is laughable, especially in comparison to the Sangh Parivaar, which actually fought to restore the constitution the only time it was actually under threat, during the Emergency.  

Indian constitution is based upon true human and Secular values. 

I am afraid that Sangh Parivar could never be faithful to the Indian Constitution while they are more loyal to the Hindu Religious texts than the Indian constitution. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Alam_dar

[Alam_dar]

Today all things are available on the Internet, and very difficult to hide the truth. 

I have already found the multiple references from online Manusmriti. But are you  or @Moochad ever going to accept that there is discrimination in the sacred religious texts? 

I don't want to win any argument. I am nothing and no one. I only want to see the rise of Humanity in us. 

 

Still if you think direct references from Manusmriti could change your mind, then few references are as under: 

 

(1) Killing of low caste Person is equal to killing the animals

Manusmriti (LINK):

मार्जारनकुलौ हत्वा चाषं मण्डूकमेव च । 
श्वगोधौलूककाकांश्च शूद्रहत्याव्रतं चरेत् ॥ १३१ ॥

Translation:

Having killed a cat, an ichneumon, a blue jay, a frog, a dog, an iguana, an owl and a crow,—he shall perform the penance of the ‘Śūdra-killer.’—(131)

 

Comparative notes by various authors (verses 11.131-132):

Gautama (22-19).—‘For injuring a frog, an ichneumon, a crow, a chameleon, a musk-rat, a mouse or a dog (the penance is the same as that for the murder of a Vaiśya).’

Baudhāyana (1.19.6).—‘For killing a flamingo, a Bhāsa bird, a peacock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a Pracetaka, a crow, an owl, a frog, a musk-rat, a dog, a Babhru, a common ichneumon, and so forth, the offender shall pay the same fine as for the killing of a Śūdra.’

Āpastamba (1.25.13).—‘If a crow, a chameleon, a pea-cock, a Brāhmaṇī duck, a swan, the vulture called Bhāsa, a frog, an ichneumon, a musk-rat, or a dog has been killed, then the offender should perform the same penance as that for killing a Śūdra.’

Vaṣhiṣṭha (21.24).—‘Having slain a dog, a cat, an ichneumon, a snake, a frog, or a rat,—one shall perform the Kṛcchra penance of twelve days’ duration, and also give something to a Brāhmaṇa.’

Viṣṇu (50.30-32).—‘If he has intentionally killed a dog, he should fast for three days. If he has unintentionally killed a mouse, or a cat, or an ichneumon, or a frog, or a Duṇḍubha snake, or a large serpent—he must fast for one day, and on the next day give a dish of milk, sesamum and rice mixed together to a Brāhmaṇa and give him an iron hoe as his fee: If he has unintentionally killed an iguana, or an owl, or a crow, or a fish, he must fast for three days.’

 

2. If a person of lower caste adopts the occupation of a higher caste, the king ought to deprive him of all his property and expel him from his kingdom.

Manusmriti, Verse 10.96 (Link):

 

यो लोभादधमो जात्या जीवेदुत्कृष्टकर्मभिः । 
तं राजा निर्धनं कृत्वा क्षिप्रमेव प्रवासयेत् ॥ ९६ ॥

Translation:

If a man of low caste, through greed, subsists by the occupations of his superiors (higher caste), him the King shall deprive of his property and quickly banish.—(96)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘A man of low caste’—The Kṣatriya and the rest Though the context deals with the Kṣatriya, yet this verse is meant to be an interdict upon all occupations of the Brāhmaṇa, for all the other castes.

‘Superior’.—It is the Brāhmaṇa alone who is absolutely (not only relatively) ‘superior.’

‘Occupations’.—Teaching and the rest.

If he subsists by these, he should be punished with confiscation of property and banishment.—(96)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 363), which adds the explanation that—‘if the Vaiśya or other lower castes should have recourse to the modes of living ordained for the higher castes, he should have all his property confiscated and then banished from the kingdom;—and in Vivādacintāmaṇi(Calcutta p. 101).

 

3. If a Shudra (lowest caste member) dares to give moral lessons to a Brahmin, the king is to get him punished by pouring hot oil in his ear and mouth

Manusmriti, Verse 8.272 (Link):

 

धर्मोपदेशं दर्पेण विप्राणामस्य कुर्वतः । 
तप्तमासेचयेत् तैलं वक्त्रे श्रोत्रे च पार्थिवः ॥ २७२ ॥

Translation:

If through arrogance, he (Shudra) teaches brāhmaṇas their duty, the king shall pour heated oil into his mouth and ears.—(272)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

Sometimes Śūdras, ‘through arrogance’ due to a slight knowledge of grammar, address to Brāhmaṇas such advice as—‘this is your duty,’—‘such is the procedure of this rite’—‘do not do it in this manner, you who are learned in the Veda.’ And the text lays down the penalty for such Śūdras. If however a Śūdra has learnt things through his association with Brāhmaṇas, and points out lapses as to proper time and place due to forgetting the details, in a friendly manner, with such words as—‘Do not please omit the morning time,’ ‘fulfil your duties towards the gods,’ ‘satisfy the gods,’ ‘wear the cloth over your right shoulder, and not the reverse,’—then there is nothing wrong in this.

‘Heated’—put into fire and hence painful.

‘Pour’—make it flow.

“It is right that it should be poured into his mouth, since it is with the mouth that he offers the advice. But what is the fault of the ears?”

Their fault lies in having listened to misguided reasonings (which make him think himself qualified for offering the advice).—(272)

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Viṣṇu (5-24).—‘If a low-born man, through arrogance, give instruction to a member of the highest caste, concerning his duty, let the King order hot oil to be poured into his mouth.’

Nārada (15-16.24).—‘If the Śūdra is insolent enough to give lessons to Brāhmaṇas regarding their duty, the King shall order hot oil to he poured into his mouth and ears.’

Bṛhaspati (20.12).—‘A Śūdra teaching the precepts of religion, or uttering the words of the Veda, or insulting a Brāhmaṇa, shall he punished by cutting out his tongue.’

 

 4.  If a Shudra occupies the same seat as a Brahmin, he is to be punished by branding his waist (with hot rod) or getting his buttocks cut!

 

Manusmriti, Verse 8.281 (Link):

 

सहासनमभिप्रेप्सुरुत्कृष्टस्यापकृष्टजः । 
कट्यां कृताङ्को निर्वास्यः स्फिचं वाऽस्यावकर्तयेत् ॥ २८१ ॥

Translation:

If a low-born person tries to occupy the same seat with his superior, he should be branded on the hip and banished; or the king shall have his buttocks cut off.—(281)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

‘Superior’—i.e., the Brāhmaṇa, who is always ‘superior’ by reason of his caste, even though he be ‘inferior’ on account of his bad character. In the case of the other castes ‘superiority’ and ‘inferiority’ are relative and comparative (so that everyone of them may be ‘superior’ and also ‘inferior’). It is for this reason that the text has used the term ‘lowborn,’ where the term ‘born’ shows that what is meant is ‘inferiority’ by birth; hence on account of its proximity, the ‘superiority’ also should be understood to be by birth. This superiority by birth belongs to the Brāhmaṇa, irrespectively of other considerations, and he is never ‘inferior.’ From all which it follows that the punishment here laid down is for the Śūdrawho occupies the same seat with the Brāhmaṇa.

‘Hips,’—buttocks;—‘branded’ upon that. This ‘branding’ is to be not mere marking with lime or saffron or such things; but it is to be indicative of the man’s having undergone the punishment; so that others might fight shy of the same transgression. Hence the marking prescribed is one that is ineffaceable, and should he done with an iron-nail or some such thing; as is going to be laid down below (8.352)—‘Punishments that strike terror, etc., etc.’

He should also be ‘banished’ from the kingdom.

‘Sphik’ is the name of a part of the buttocks, on both the right and the left side. This he ‘shall have cut off.’ In as much as this is an alternative to ‘branding,’ it is only the part, and not the entire buttock, that is to be cut off.

‘Tries to occupy’;—the man is to be punished not merely for trying to do so, but only when he has actually occupied it; because the mere wish or attempt can be hidden (and hence may not he discovered), and also because the penalty laid down is very severe.—(281) 

 

 

Comparative notes by various authors:

Gautama (12.7).—‘If he assumes a position equal to that of twice-born men, in sitting, in lying down, in conversation, or on the road, he shall undergo corporal punishment.’

Āpastamba (2.27.15).—‘A. Śūdra who assumes a position equal to that of a member of the first three castes, in conversation, on the road, or a coach, in sitting and on similar occasions, shall be flogged.’

Viṣṇu (5.20).—‘If he places himself on the same seat with his superior, he shall be banished with a mark on his buttocks.’

Nārada (15-16. 26).—‘A low-born man, who tries to place himself on the same seat with his superior in caste, shall be branded on his hip and banished; or the King shall cause his backside to be gashed.’

 

 5. If a person of lower varna (caste) has sexual intercourse with a woman of higher varna, with or without her consent, he is to be killed

 

Manusmriti, Verse 8.366 (Link):

 

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

उत्तमां सेवमानस्तु जघन्यो वधमर्हति । 
शुल्कं दद्यात् सेवमानः समामिच्छेत् पिता यदि ॥ ३६६ ॥

Translation:

An inferior man courting a superior maiden deserves death; he who courts a maiden of equal status, shall pay the nuptial fee, if her father so wishes.—(366).

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has been said that in the case of violating an unwilling maiden, all men, be they superior or inferior, should suiter death, with the sole exception of the Brāhmaṇa; and the present verse, they say, lays down the law relating to the violating of a willing maiden.

‘Superior,’—in beauty, youth, caste and other points.

‘Inferior’—the lowest.

The man is not to be killed if there is any equality between the parties.

If a man approaches a willing maiden who is equal to him in status,—he shall pay to her father the nuptial fee, as is done in the case of the ‘Asura’ form of marriage. But if the father does not desire to receive the fee, that amount shall be paid as fine to the king.

“In as much as this would he a case of ‘Gāndharva’ marriage—marriage by mutual consent,—it cannot be right to inflict any punishment.”

Who has said that there is to be no punishment in the case of marriage by mutual consent? In fact such an act would not be one befitting a chaste woman; nor would it he regarded as ‘marriage,’ for the simple reason that it would not have a sacramental character. As for the declaration in the Mahābhārata, in connection with Śakuntalā, to the effect that ‘the Gāndharva is a form of marriage, without fire and without mantras,’—this was an assertion made by Duṣyanta while he was suffering from the pangs of love. Further, mere ‘willing intercourse’ does not constitute ‘marriage.’ Marriage has been classified under eight heads on the basis of different methods used for taking a wife; and it does not mean that there are eight kinds of marriage. So that (in the Gāndharva marriage also), the due selection of the bridegroom (even though he has been already chosen by the bride) and the subsequent rites have got to be performed.

Or, the ‘Gāndharva’ may be accepted as a ‘marriage’ only in the case of a maiden after puberty; and before that, the man is to pay the nuptial fee or a fine.

The question arises—what is to be done with the maiden?

The answer is that she shall be given to that same man. But if she has ceased to love him, she may be given to another man. But in either case the ‘nuptial fee’ has got to be paid, by way of compensation for the single act of intercourse.

If the man has ceased to love the girl, he shall be forced to accept her.—(366)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha:

This verse is quoted in Vivādaratnākara (p. 402), which adds the following notes:—‘Uttamām’ has to be qualified by ‘if willing’;—‘samām,’ belonging to the same caste as himself;—‘śulkam’, fee agreed upon by both the parties, as in the ‘Āsura’ form of marriage.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 321), to the effect that when a man of the lower caste has intercourse with a maiden of a higher caste, whether willing or unwilling, his penalty is death, but when one has intercourse with a willing maiden of the same caste as himself, then he shall present to her father a cow and a bull, if the latter be willing to accept it (and the man has to marry the maiden in this case, adds Bālambhaṭṭī); but if the father is not willing to receive the fee, its equivalent shall be paid as fine to the king (and in this case also the maiden is to be married to the man).

It is quoted in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, 157a).

 

6. If a Brahmin (highest caste) abuses a Shudra (lowest caste), he is to be fined mildly, but if a Shudra abuses a Brahmin, he is to be killed

Manusmriti, Verse 8.267 [Verbal Assault (Abuse and Defamation)] (Link):

 

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

शतं ब्राह्मणमाक्रुश्य क्षत्रियो दण्डमर्हति । 
वैश्योऽप्यर्धशतं द्वे वा शूद्रस्तु वधमर्हति ॥ २६७ ॥

Translation:

On abusing a Brāhmaṇa the Kṣatriya should be fined one hundred; and the Vaiśya one hundred and fifty; or two hundred; the Śūdra however deserves immolation.—(267)

 

Manusmriti, Verse 8.268 (Link):

 

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

पञ्चाशद् ब्राह्मणो दण्ड्यः क्षत्रियस्याभिशंसने । 
वैश्ये स्यादर्धपञ्चाशत्शूद्रे द्वादशको दमः ॥ २६८ ॥

Translation:

For abusing a Kṣatriya, the Brāhmaṇa should be fined fifty; and in the case of a Vaiśya, the fine shall be twenty-five; and in that of a Shudra, twelve.—(268)

 

7. The families of non-believers are destroyed sooner than later

Manusmriti, Verse 3.65 (Link):

 

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

अयाज्ययाजनैश्चैव नास्तिक्येन च कर्मणाम् । 
कुलान्याशु विनश्यन्ति यानि हीनानि मन्त्रतः ॥ ६५ ॥

Translation:

By sacrificing for men unworthy to offer sacrifices and by denying (the future rewards for good) works, families, deficient in the (knowledge of the) Veda, quickly perish.—(65)

 

 

8. Oppression against Women:

Treating women as unequal:

• Women, that is, even women belonging to Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vaishya varna are not entitled to upanayan and the study of the Vedas. For them, marriage is equivalent to upanayan and service of their husbands is equivalent to the study of the Vedas in the gurukul (Manusmriti, Verse 2.67).
   
• Even if the husband is morally degraded, engaged in an affair with another woman and is devoid of knowledge and other qualities, the wife must treat him like a god (Manusmriti, Verse 5.154). 
   
• Besides, women are not considered fit for being free and independent. They are to be protected in their childhood by father, in youth by husband and in old age by son (Manusmriti, Verse 9.3).  They should never be allowed by their guardians to act independently (Manusmriti, Verse 9.2).  A woman must never do anything even inside her home without the consent of her father, husband and son respectively (Manusmriti, Verse 5.147).  She must remain in control of her father in childhood, of husband in youth and of son after the death of her husband(Manusmriti, Verse 5.148).

 

Additionally, until the 18th century hindu house wives were burnt along with their dead husbands in name of Sati Pratha.

“Mention of the practice can be dated back to the 3rd century BC” Eraly, Abraham. The First Spring: The Golden Age of India . Penguin. p. 370

That being said, there were many attempts to stop this practice by ‘outsiders’.

• Mughal emperor Akbar issued an order to prevent any use of compulsion in sati. Auranzeb too pass an order "in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".
• Attempts to limit or ban the practice had been made by individual British officers in the 18th century without any official order from East India company.

 

[Moochad]

2 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Today all things are available on the Internet, and very difficult to hide the truth. 

I have already found the multiple references from online Manusmriti. But are you  or @Moochad ever going to accept that there is discrimination in the sacred religious texts? 

I don't want to win any argument. I am nothing and no one. I only want to see the rise of Humanity in us. 

 

Still if you think direct references from Manusmriti could change your mind, then few references are as under: 

...

 

WTH, I mean, you lie through the skin of your teeth:

Both I and @Tibarn have already said there was discrimination, you create a strawman because your propaganda is called out when you can't back up your specific claims and then run around like a headless chicken spamming random out of context quotes of the manu smriti instead of answering what was asked of you.

  Quote

You are quoting an Exceptional case of one person. 

 

Prove it, I and @Tibarn have listed numerous Dalits and Shudras who achieved the highest position:

Shivaji (Shudra)

Surajmal (Shudra)

Maharaja Suheldev Pasi (Dalit)

Chandragupta Maurya (Shudra)

Prolaya Vema Reddy (Shudra)

Sant Ravidas(Dalit)

Sage Valmiki(Dalit or Shudra, there is debate)

 

  On 6/22/2018 at 5:10 AM, Alam_dar said:

But sad and brutal reality is this that they didn't considered Dalits as Human Beings.

Where is the evidence that Brahmins didn't consider Dalits human beings?

 

You have only given references to Shudras, and saying someone is unequal doesn't mean you don't think they are human beings that is your extrapolation. Prove it.

 

  Quote

So, hindu or no hindu, what difference is it going to make when they were not even Human Beings for upper caste Hindus?

Prove it, give a source where they say Dalits are not humans, if you can't quit spamming the thread with your propaganda. Seeing someone unequal does not mean you don't see someone as human.

 

  Quote

You say they were considered Hindu. But were they allowed to enter the Mandirs? Or Mandirs became filthy due to their presence?

Do you have proof that Dalits were never allowed in temples? Do you have a textual reference which prohibits them from temples across all of India, in all 4 major forms of Hinduism: Vedic/Shaivite/Vaishnavite/Mata-derived?  

 

  Quote

But were they allowed to touch and read the holy Hindu Books? Or were they beaten for entering the Mandirs and touching and reading the holy books?

Again, I want a source which said Dalits weren't allowed to read Holy books of Hindus. I already gave examples of Dalits: Sant Ravidas a Dalit who was considered the Guru of Shivaji and was honored by the Brahmins of Banaras and bowed down to by them. There is also Sage Valmiki who wrote the definitive version of the Ramayana

 

Provide specific sources that agree with your claims, quit dodging.

[Tibarn]

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

I still hope that one day Humanity comes first, and even if nationalism (Chauvinism) and religion survive at the hands of science and knowledge, then still they become weaker enough to cause any harm to the humanity.

You can hope whatever you want, I am not going to correct you, I don't consider it my business to sway peoples opinions one way or another...

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

No, not I am.

But it is the humanity in you which will always guide you to the correct path.

Just don't let the humanity be suppressed by the religion or nationalism. 

As if humanity is in contention with those things. 

 

 

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Problem is you people are targeting me. 
I am no one. 
I request you to concentrate on the subject and try to do Justice. 

Now you are playing victim, neither me nor Moochad quoted you initially.

 

Only you felt the need to quote either of us and try to evangelize. 

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

What is difficult in understanding the discrimination and humiliation of humanity in these religious texts? 

I once again tell you, only one reference is enough. 
And here we have full Manusmriti full of such discriminations, here we have millions of Dalits being humiliated for centuries. But you still sticking to such philosophy while you were born in a Hindu family. 

The reference you used refers to Shudras, (which is what I am, and you are telling me that I and my family have been discriminated against despite no historical evidence of the same). You are again conflating Dalit and Shudra. 

 

Should I say, self described atheists and secular organizations are sticking to a philosophies that have murdered/genocided far more people than Hinduism, with actual references which denote the numbers of people/estimates, yet you are propagating that/those? Am I to believe that because when some Atheists seem to come into power they brutally destroy countless human lives and often persecute religious believers or nonbelievers in the Atheists' given philosophy? Should I extrapolate that backwards/outwards and say all atheists are closeted genocidal maniacs who desire to suppress anyone who they view as a detriment to what they view as progress?

 

What's funny is your own posts are discriminating against people who consider themselves nationalists/religious by stating that their focus on humanity is limited by those traits of theirs, while you are fashioning yourself a thekedar of humanity and what is or isn't humane, when in reality there are many countless religious/nationalist people who have contributed far more to the well being of "humanity" than a self described "no one".   

 

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Humanity in you itself decides what is right and what is wrong. 
Humanity is crying in you that such discrimination by the religious texts is totally against it. But for the sake of religion, the voice of humanity has been strangled.

Vague, meaningless statement. Show me where something called "humanity" resides within a person

 

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Humanity is absolutely not vague. 
One only have to listen to it 

The things which are really VAGUE are Allah, God and Bhagwan. 

And it is vague if really any Quran or Bible or Vedas ever came from any Allah, God or Bhagwan, or they were the human writings.

Definition of humanity 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/humanity

1. all human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.
2. the quality or condition of being human; human nature.
3. the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.

 

If it is not vague, then you could give some quantifiable measure of what humanity is and some comparative analysis of what benefits humanity, particularly why what you advocate helps humanity and what you are against hurts humanity.  

 

You are also assuming humanity is "good", are you sure this is the case?

 

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Indian constitution is based upon true human and Secular values. 

I am afraid that Sangh Parivar could never be faithful to the Indian Constitution while they are more loyal to the Hindu Religious texts than the Indian constitution. 

Please prove that the Indian constitution is based on true human and Secular values. 

 

Is the Indian constitution Secular if it allows preferential rights to minorities over Hindus (as is the case)?  

4 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

I already posted one Reference DIRECTLY from the Manusmriti.
But what happened?
Neither you, nor @Moochad even touched it. 

This is special state of mind, where even if Ram himself comes down from the heavens and tell you these problems in the Hindu religious scripts, still you are going to deny Ram himself. 

 

This one reference is enough to leave religion, if one really starts thinking independently. If Muslims would have been practising it, then for you it would have become a non-forgiveable crime. But since it has been practised by Hindus, then you are not even ready to blame the sacred Hindu texts for being discriminatory. 

1 )Moochad already did a point-by-point answer to many of the quotes from the website you copy and pasted from, you are flat out lying now.  

 

Neither I, nor I suspect him, are going to answer every giant post you make in this thread until you actually either support your initial claims you made with specific references (as shown by moochad above) or admit that you don't have specific references.

 

2) you initially didn't quote directly from Manusmriti, you copy and pasted from a propaganda website and got called out for it. (Which is what I was laughing at)

3) If you actually want to play, then I will ask you a series of single questions, 1st one:

 

What is the difference of smriti and shruti texts in Hinduism?  

 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Tibarn

[Moochad]

deleted

Edited June 23, 2018 by Moochad

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Moochad said:

 

Both I and @Tibarn have already said there was discrimination,

When you accept there is discrimination and human humiliation in the sacred religious texts, then I wonder how could you still follow the religion? 

 

Please try to understand, the DIVINE system works upon 100% PERFECTION. There is no 99.99% thing, while even this 0.0001% imperfection makes them human and not divine. 

 

And if Rishishs wrote it and made a mistake, then they could have also been contacted and corrected by the divine deities as they contacted them for the Vedas in the state of samadhi i.e. Shruti. 

 

While we have here human humiliation of that level which was not even present in Islamic slavery. 

 

The proven facts of discrimination and humiliation of Dalits is proof enough that these sacred religious texts are not divine, but from humans who were full of faults. 

 

The discussion should already end here with this. 

 

And I have already stated, I am no one. 

 

Quote

you create a strawman because your propaganda is called out when you can't back up your specific claims and then run around like a headless chicken spamming random out of context quotes of the manu smriti instead of answering what was asked of you.

  Quote

You are quoting an Exceptional case of one person. 

 

Prove it, I and @Tibarn have listed numerous Dalits and Shudras who achieved the highest position:

Shivaji (Shudra)

Surajmal (Shudra)

Maharaja Suheldev Pasi (Dalit)

Chandragupta Maurya (Shudra)

Prolaya Vema Reddy (Shudra)

Sant Ravidas(Dalit)

Sage Valmiki(Dalit or Shudra, there is debate)

This has already become non-Issue with already proven discrimination. You are sticking to this issue while you are only targeting me now. 

 

I don't know when the Dalit person existed. While it seems that caste system was not so strong till around 2500 years ago. 

 

And Shudra Kings was a political thing where they had the powers and I don't think this could eliminate the discrimination in the sacred religious texts. 

Quote

 

  On 6/22/2018 at 5:10 AM, Alam_dar said:

But sad and brutal reality is this that they didn't considered Dalits as Human Beings.

Where is the evidence that Brahmins didn't consider Dalits human beings?

 

You have only given references to Shudras, and saying someone is unequal doesn't mean you don't think they are human beings that is your extrapolation. Prove it.

 

  Quote

So, hindu or no hindu, what difference is it going to make when they were not even Human Beings for upper caste Hindus?

Prove it, give a source where they say Dalits are not humans, if you can't quit spamming the thread with your propaganda. Seeing someone unequal does not mean you don't see someone as human.

Again you are making a non-issue a crises here. 

 

If killing of Dalit was equal to killing the frog or dog, then indeed Brahmans didn't consider Dalits as equal Human Beings, but something lower that this. 

 

You could keep on making it a crises, but I just hope you could come out of this mindset. 

 

 

Quote

  Quote

You say they were considered Hindu. But were they allowed to enter the Mandirs? Or Mandirs became filthy due to their presence?

Do you have proof that Dalits were never allowed in temples? Do you have a textual reference which prohibits them from temples across all of India, in all 4 major forms of Hinduism: Vedic/Shaivite/Vaishnavite/Mata-derived?  

There are multiple incidents of prohibition of Dalits entering in the Mandirs which have been reported in the newspapers. 

 

The reason for this hatred and humiliation again lies fully in the sacred texts. Otherwise please tell us why High caste Hindus prohibiting Dalits from entering these mandirs? 

Quote

  Quote

But were they allowed to touch and read the holy Hindu Books? Or were they beaten for entering the Mandirs and touching and reading the holy books?

Again, I want a source which said Dalits weren't allowed to read Holy books of Hindus. I already gave examples of Dalits: Sant Ravidas a Dalit who was considered the Guru of Shivaji and was honored by the Brahmins of Banaras and bowed down to by them. There is also Sage Valmiki who wrote the definitive version of the Ramayana

The answer us given in Brahma Sutras by Badrayana Vyasa.

It's said that Purificatory ceremonies like Upanayana etc. are declared by the scriptures to be a necessary condition of the study of all kinds of knowledge or Vidyâ; but these are meant only for the higher castes. Their absence in the case of the Sudras. So they are not allowed to read vedas.

संस्कारपरामर्शात् तदभावाभिलापाच्च ॥ 1.3.36 ॥ 
  
saṃskāraparāmarśāt    tadabhāvābhilāpācca || 36|| 
 
36. Because purificatory ceremonies are mentioned (in the case of the twice-born) and their absence are declared (in the case of the Sudras).

Not only they are allowed to read vedas but it's even said that a shudra should not even listen to vedas while they being recited.

श्रवणाध्ययनार्थप्रतिषेधात् स्मृतेश्च ॥ 1.3.38 ॥ 
 

śravaṇādhyayanārthapratiṣedhāt smṛteśca || 38 || 
 

38. And because of the prohibition in the Smriti of hearing and studying (the Vedas) and knowing their meaning and performing Vedic rites (to Sudras, they are not entitled to the knowledge of Brahman).

So it's because the Upanayana ceremony or the samskaras which is not performed in case of Shudra ,they are not allowed to read , listen or to study veda. And that's why it's not allowed in smiritis.

 

===

If this is true, then I could also understand why some temples are not letting enter the Shudars, while Vedas are recited in these temples, while Dalits are not allowed to even listen them. 

 

 

Quote

Provide specific sources that agree with your claims, quit dodging.

Once again, I am no one. If I have made any wrong claim according to you, then I simply take it back. For me, the discussion already became over when the first instance of discrimination by the 100% perfect Hindu gods was established. 

For you too, it should have ended long time ago. Please change your religious mindset and start thinking like Buddha did, where he gave preference to humanity upon religion and traditions. 

 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Alam_dar

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

You can hope whatever you want, I am not going to correct you, I don't consider it my business to sway peoples opinions one way or another...

Yes, Buddah hoped for ending of slavery and caste system. And his followers succeeded in it. 

And then again slavery was abolished from whole world in the 20th century. 

Dreams do become true, if one has true heart and intentions and when indeed consider slavery and caste system as evils which should be eliminated one day or another. 

 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

As if humanity is in contention with those things. 

When nationalism takes the colours of Chauvinism, and religions insist upon blind following and killing and humiliation of humanity, then indeed they are in contention with Humanity. 

 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

 

The reference you used refers to Shudras, (which is what I am, and you are telling me that I and my family have been discriminated against despite no historical evidence of the same). You are again conflating Dalit and Shudra. 

Shudras are in huge numbers. 

If due to some political reasons the teachings of Manusmriti were not successfully implemented, then it does not mean that there is no discrimination in the Hindu Sacred texts. 

Dalits are even in worse state than the Shudras. 

 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

Should I say, self described atheists and secular organizations are sticking to a philosophies that have murdered/genocided far more people than Hinduism, with actual references which denote the numbers of people/estimates, yet you are propagating that/those?

You are whole heartedly welcome to criticize the atheism and genocides it did. We could make this world only better through open criticism and then reform. We have already reformed ourselves a lot as human being and have become much more civilized than before. 
Problem with religion is this that there is no space of REFORM in religion. Thus millions of slaves and Dalits faced humiliation for centuries at hands of religion, and it was only the non-religious Secular Europe which broke the chains of religious slavery and also defeated the caste system to such extent that Indian Constitution is now free of this evil of caste system. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

What's funny is your own posts are discriminating against people who consider themselves nationalists/religious by stating that their focus on humanity is limited by those traits of theirs, while you are fashioning yourself a thekedar of humanity and what is or isn't humane, when in reality there are many countless religious/nationalist people who have contributed far more to the well being of "humanity" than a self described "no one".   

How is it discrimination when Muslims themselves agree that (due to Humanity in them) that slavery was against the Humanity and Hindus too agree that caste system is against Humanity? 

Reality is this that humanity within Muslims and Hindus has already guided them these things are evils, but still they were unable to get rid of them due to the religious brainwashing and religious fears. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

Vague, meaningless statement. Show me where something called "humanity" resides within a person

If you don't believe in humanity, then you could also never believe in presence of LOVE and it would also become meaningless for you just like humanity. 

But reality is this you could feel the both, the love and the humanity. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

 

Definition of humanity 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/humanity

1. all human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.
2. the quality or condition of being human; human nature.
3. the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.

What is the problem? All this comes under the humanity. Feeling for the other fellow human beings, feeling their plight, their pain, their love, their emotions, all is humanity. Even showing love to the animals also come under humanity. 
How then it becomes vague when it is present so much in human life?

As compared to humanity, Allah and God and Bhagwan are not only totally vague, but also all these 3 (i.e. Allah, God, Bhagwan) are denying the presence of each other. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

If it is not vague, then you could give some quantifiable measure of what humanity is and some comparative analysis of what benefits humanity, particularly why what you advocate helps humanity and what you are against hurts humanity.  

Can you quantify love? 
Humanity within us guiding us what is right and what is wrong. What is justice and what is oppression (like Sati of women was oppression, but religious brainwashing overpowered the humanity and thus this evil practice continued for centuries and religion is fully responsible for this crime). 
This humanity helped us to form the Secular systems where all human beings are free of slavery and getting equal human rights. We are still far from being perfect on the practical level, but we could still dream for the best as we know what is the right path. 
 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

Please prove that the Indian constitution is based on true human and Secular values. 

Off course. 
Indian constitution is not based upon the religious sacred texts which legalise and implement caste system and slavery system. 
I don't know why you doubt about Indian Constitution being Secular and based upon equal Human Rights. 

 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

Is the Indian constitution Secular if it allows preferential rights to minorities over Hindus (as is the case)?  

Again you are trying to make "exceptional case" as crises, which it is not. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

1 )Moochad already did a point-by-point answer to many of the quotes from the website you copy and pasted from, you are flat out lying now.  

Not a single answer to direct reference of Manusmriti. And it is also not possible while today religious brainwashing has gone back a long way and not possible to defend the evils of caste system openly today. 

1 hour ago, Tibarn said:

What is the difference of smriti and shruti texts in Hinduism?  

I am no one and not interested in such games. 

 

Reality is very clear. You need not to be bona fide Scholar of Hindu religious texts in order to see the plight of the Dalits at the hands of the high caste Hindus for the centuries.