False Allegation on Manu (ManuSmriti and Women))

[aryaveer]

i here produce a rebuttal to the article by nirmukta admin..

http://nirmukta.com/2011/08/27/the-statu...anusmriti/

it is known already by one and all the manusmriti is one the oldest and most aulterated scripture of hindus like most other scriptures(Except Vedas). so it is but normal to find such verses. it is on the scrutinizer to check and find whihc verses are of actual original manusmriti.
without scrutinizing just belittling a scripture revered by millions is a deed irrespectable and of no honour.

here is

The stand of manusmriti on women(original)

.
[fon‌t=Arial]
prove it false if you can!![/font]

Even the modern feminist books would have to seek further amendments to match up to Manu Smriti.
I am yet to read a text that so unambiguously proclaims that women form the foundation of a prosperous society.

IMPORTANCE OF HAPPY WOMEN

3.56. The society that provides respect and dignity to women flourishes with nobility and prosperity. And a society that does not put women on such a high pedestal has to face miseries and failures regardless of howsomuch noble deeds they perform otherwise.

3.55. A father, brother, husband or brother-in-law should keep their daughter, sister, wife or sister-in-law happy and pleased through gentle words, respectful behavior, gifts etc. Those who desire prosperity should ensure that women in their family are always happy and do not face miseries.

3.57. A family where women remain unhappy due to misdeeds of their men is bound to be destroyed. And a family where women are always happy is bound to prosper forever.

3.58. A family- where women feel insulted or discriminated against and curse their menfolk- is destroyed in same manner as poison kills all those who eat it.

3.59. One desiring glory should ensure that he keeps women in the family by giving them respect and pleasing them with good ornaments, dresses, food. Women should always be revered under all circumstances.

Polygamy is a sin

9.101. Husband and Wife should remain together till death. They should not approach any other partner, nor commit adultery. This, in summary, is the Dharma or religion of all human beings.


[fon‌t=Arial]Autonomy of Women[/font]

9.11. Women should be provided autonomy and leadership in managing the finances, maintaining hygiene, spiritual and religious activities, nutrition and overall management of home.

Marriage of Women

9.89. It is better to keep the daughter unmarried than force her to marry an undeserving person.

9.90-91. A woman can choose her own husband after attaining maturity. If her parents are unable to choose a deserving groom, she can herself choose her husband.

Property Rights of Women

9.130. A daughter is equivalent to a son. In her presence, how can any one snatch away her right over the property.

9.131. A daughter alone has the right over personal property of her mother.
Thus, as per Manu, while daughter has equal share as her brothers over property of her father, she has exclusive rights over property of her mother. The reason for this special treatment of women is to ensure that women are never at mercy of anyone. After all happy dignified women form the foundation of a happy society!

9.212-213. If a person has no kins or wife, then his wealth be distributed equally among his brothers and sisters. If the elder brother refuses to give due share to other brothers and sisters, he is punishable by law.

this is just half article.......Complete article to be read here on agniveer (link below)!!!
and please bring all your comments .... i welcome them ...but please bring them on the agniveer platform, you do not need to register and your comments are immediately automatic approved... (i prefer agniveer platform for it is more active and i am not active here!!)

http://agniveer.com/4276/manu-smriti-and-women/

[Lije]

Agniveer, I'm quite familiar with the kind of historic revisionism you guys do. This is not a forum to debate those revisionisms. You can do that on our facebook debate group.

[arvindiyer]

(28-Sep-2011, 09:47 AM)aryaveer Wrote: it is known already by one and all the manusmriti is one the oldest and most aulterated scripture of hindus like most other scriptures(Except Vedas).

On what basis do you suggest that the verses quoted by Dr. Patwari are the result of an 'adulteration' and the verses quoted by you are part of the pristine original?
What evidence would you have against a similar claim that the seemingly benign verses you quote are themselves not part of the original, but later interpolations as part of a watering-down exercise?

[aryaveer]

(28-Sep-2011, 11:34 AM)arvindiyer Wrote: On what basis do you suggest that the verses quoted by Dr. Patwari are the result of an 'adulteration' and the verses quoted by you are part of the pristine original?
What evidence would you have against a similar claim that the seemingly benign verses you quote are themselves not part of the original, but later interpolations as part of a watering-down exercise?

first thing.. in a similar manner on what basis dr. patwari gives only those verses and not plenty of the other verses like this??
it simply shows that dr. patwari is biased and bent on showing that the manusmriti is bad!
dr. patwari should have said clearly that such contradicting verses are present hence one of these is adulterations. say if i am wrong?

secondly, the contradicting verses are present hence they show that the book is adulterated. so even if we cannot decide what was actual stand of manu on women is it not wrong to impose you stand of manu on manusmriti and try to allege falsely that manusmriti says false for women??

thirdly, had manu been so biased about women, had he written so irrational and stupid and biased views in his manusmriti, he would have never got upto a stature of maharshi manu as he enjoys today in society. neither the manu smriti would have been so revered by one and all if all these to be part of actual manusmriti.
please think unbiased....

i am not saying you to believe on god or anything but just why to belittle a scripture which you dont know is actually saying what!!!

[LMC]

go easy with flashy colors,smileys and fonts and this is the place to discuss such issues https://www.facebook.com/groups/IndianAtheists/

[Ajita Kamal]

(28-Sep-2011, 01:52 PM)aryaveer Wrote:

(28-Sep-2011, 11:34 AM)arvindiyer Wrote: On what basis do you suggest that the verses quoted by Dr. Patwari are the result of an 'adulteration' and the verses quoted by you are part of the pristine original?
What evidence would you have against a similar claim that the seemingly benign verses you quote are themselves not part of the original, but later interpolations as part of a watering-down exercise?

first thing.. in a similar manner on what basis dr. patwari gives only those verses and not plenty of the other verses like this??
it simply shows that dr. patwari is biased and bent on showing that the manusmriti is bad!

Plenty of apologists like yourself are constantly touting the supposedly "good" verses of these dictatorial manuscripts. When rationalists attempt to point out the hypocrisy by ferreting out the passages you apologists ignore when you propagate your ideology, you turn around and accuse them of not being balanced. The irony, of course, escapes you.

Apologists are very good at seeing BS in other religions, so here's an analogy for you. How often have you heard Islamic apologists say Islam is a religion of peace and that Islam gives women rights, and how often have you seen through their bullshit? Hindu apologists like yourself love to point out all the violent passages in the quran. And, surprise, so do we rationalists. When we do that, it doesn't mean that we are not aware of the contradictory claims in the quran that seem to support women and seem to stand for peace, it just means we are balancing the narrative by pointing to the duplicitous nature of scripture, designed to allow any person see their strongest desires expressed through it, justifying their own whims as the word of god. You Hindus are no better.

[arvindiyer]

(28-Sep-2011, 01:52 PM)aryaveer Wrote: secondly, the contradicting verses are present hence they show that the book is adulterated. so even if we cannot decide what was actual stand of manu on women is it not wrong to impose you stand of manu on manusmriti and try to allege falsely that manusmriti says false for women??
....i am not saying you to believe on god or anything but just why to belittle a scripture which you dont know is actually saying what!!!

For the record, a response to the above has already been posted here.

[Lije]

(28-Sep-2011, 06:12 PM)Ajita Kamal Wrote: Apologists are very good at seeing BS in other religions, so here's an analogy for you. How often have you heard Islamic apologists say Islam is a religion of peace and that Islam gives women rights, and how often have you seen through their bullshit? Hindu apologists like yourself love to point out all the violent passages in the quran. And, surprise, so do we rationalists. When we do that, it doesn't mean that we are not aware of the contradictory claims in the quran that seem to support women and seem to stand for peace, it just means we are balancing the narrative by pointing to the duplicitous nature of scripture, designed to allow any person see their strongest desires expressed through it, justifying their own whims as the word of god. You Hindus are no better.

That made me laugh. Because it is so true, and aryaveer is so oblivious to the irony.

It is true because agniveer.com's primary objective seems to be to spar with Islamic apologists. Their critical faculties work amazingly well when debunking Zakir Nair. They go to extreme pains to point out flaws in Islam apologetics.

Now here is where the irony gets better. There is another site called Truth Of Hinduism which does the exact same thing as agniveer.com, but from an Islamic point of view.

[svnst]

How about this!

http://haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.aspx?P...760&SKIN=C

[Lije]

(29-Sep-2011, 03:52 PM)svnst Wrote: How about this!

http://haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.aspx?P...760&SKIN=C

If you thought criticizing Sanatana Dogma automatically means that we sympathize with Christianity, you couldn't be more mistaken.

That said, that link is irrelevant here. We have a separate forum for Christianity.

Also, we don't need to link to bigots like Haindava Keralam when there are plenty of humanist sources that criticize Christianity.

[svnst]

Just spreading awareness ...

Every religion has it - they have all stated something or other derogatory about women. Relatively women enjoy better status in Hinduism than elsewhere - it is kind of like the lesser evil. Truly speaking one needs to rise above religious lookout to truly see the emanicipated woman.

[Kanad Kanhere]

(29-Sep-2011, 06:37 PM)svnst Wrote: Just spreading awareness ...

Every religion has it - they have all stated something or other derogatory about women. Relatively women enjoy better status in Hinduism than elsewhere - it is kind of like the lesser evil. Truly speaking one needs to rise above religious lookout to truly see the emanicipated woman.

On what basis do you say that women in Hinduism enjoy better status than elsewhere? How about "sati pratha", dowry deaths, child marriages, infanticides? I won't be surprised if its found out that Hinduism confers the worst environment to a woman.