Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Muslim Women's rights

  1. #11
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Muslim Women's rights

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    As far as women's rights are concerned Hindus don't have a terrific record either, particularly in some parts of India. The most honerable practice of honer killing has been adopted by hindus of NW india and is implemented frequently. As Hindus particularly those in India, we need to clean our acts in several departments, women's right being one (others being more compassion for society and others, sense of duty, less greed - which is boundless right now among afluent hindus, if you remove greed from motivation to worship tirupati will probably be deserted!).
    This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Prayers, and that too in Tirupati are not based on greed. Most devotees seek the darshan of Balaji and make enormous efforts to do so despite their poverty and other issues. There are those whose prayers are answered and to fulfill their half of the bargain, come to Tirupati to do penance (angapradakshinam etc.).

    Tirumala is the most visited sight of worship in the world as well as the richest in terms of donations. Those who cannot afford even three meals a day try to make it to Tirupati to offer something to Balaji. There is an average of 200k - 300k devotees a day at Tirupati and during festivals, more than 1 million!

    Yes, there are those who pray only for self-gain but the act of making a pilgrimage to Tirupati and offering prayers is an act of selflessness and penance in and of itself. Most prayers, not just in Hinduism I might add, are petitionary in nature. Yet, it is only the Hindus who say, "Sarve janaha sukhino bhavantu!" It is only the Hindus who do Yajnas daily to invoke peace for the entire world. While the mlecchas are busy trying to convert and deceive others, Hindus are offering prayers selflessly.

    With regards to "women's rights" in Hindu society, things only deteriorated after the PISSlamic conquest of India. To protect the Hindu women, the men married them off at a very young age and in certain instances, forced the widows to commit Sati. Although it was done as an honorable thing as Rani Padmini did, there were certain places were it was forced. It only became really bad during the 18-19th centuries. Rajaram Mohan Roy, among others, fought to vanquish this terrible practice.

    Women are treated far better in Hindu society than anywhere else in the world. Remember, there is no "right" without responsibility. A woman running around naked without restraint is no woman but a beast. Hindu women have the right sense of freedom with responsibility while maintaining traditions. All other societies swing to the extremes of no rights (muslim) or no responsibility (western).

    It is highly irksome when foreigners have the audacity to question "women's rights" of Hindus or Indian society. It is even worse when a Hindu does it.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    The best we may try to do now, is save our own culture - at least try to save it.
    Indeed. We must be proactive about preserving our traditions.

  2. #12

    Re: Muslim Women's rights

    Quote Originally Posted by TatTvamAsi View Post
    This is the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Prayers, and that too in Tirupati are not based on greed. Most devotees seek the darshan of Balaji and make enormous efforts to do so despite their poverty and other issues. There are those whose prayers are answered and to fulfill their half of the bargain, come to Tirupati to do penance (angapradakshinam etc.).

    Tirumala is the most visited sight of worship in the world as well as the richest in terms of donations. Those who cannot afford even three meals a day try to make it to Tirupati to offer something to Balaji. There is an average of 200k - 300k devotees a day at Tirupati and during festivals, more than 1 million!

    Yes, there are those who pray only for self-gain but the act of making a pilgrimage to Tirupati and offering prayers is an act of selflessness and penance in and of itself. Most prayers, not just in Hinduism I might add, are petitionary in nature. Yet, it is only the Hindus who say, "Sarve janaha sukhino bhavantu!" It is only the Hindus who do Yajnas daily to invoke peace for the entire world. While the mlecchas are busy trying to convert and deceive others, Hindus are offering prayers selflessly.
    Yes it is the richest in terms of donations.There are different pujas ranging from few hundred bucks to as high as many thousands of rupees (i think it was 40k bucks). And the costliest pujas are booked for decades in advance. And I think nothing is free. So I am not sure how those who can't manage 3 square meals can manage the darshan, but in India people will go to any length to appease the Gods, yet won't do a single thing to develop better human values, so it ain't surprizing.

    Minsters looting taxpayers money 365 days a year donate pure gold crowns costing 40 crores, perhaves as a token penance (but to me seems more like a bribe to the lord). And I am not talking of Tirupati alone but all famous shrines where display of money and greed has taken almost epic proportions. Yet one may ask what does they do with this money? In the very hills lord resides on billions of rupees worth of gold, the poor cannot be protected from Christian conversion. Ofcourse govt controls everything, but why then we assume the Lord is in charge of everything? Is anyone bothered? T

    rue most of the devotees are ordinary, but they also have to stand in ordinary lines, while those paying more get to stand in special lines. With no money you are out of luck to see the lord. This is abosutely appaling, and how much you want to defend it is not going to change the facts. Every person I know who has been to Thirupati and such shrines went for their desires to be fullfilled.

    Artha and Kama are necessary goals for any person, but to many hindu devotees they seem the only goal and they are not ashmed to blatantly display their power of money to get ahead in the appointment with Lord as well! What penance.

    This what happens when one only maintains the external decorum of religion and practices but are internally morally bankrupt.

    With regards to "women's rights" in Hindu society, things only deteriorated after the PISSlamic conquest of India. To protect the Hindu women, the men married them off at a very young age and in certain instances, forced the widows to commit Sati. Although it was done as an honorable thing as Rani Padmini did, there were certain places were it was forced. It only became really bad during the 18-19th centuries. Rajaram Mohan Roy, among others, fought to vanquish this terrible practice.
    I don't know why you need to fall back on pre-history when only 2 days back another women was mudered (now in Rajasthan) for "unlawful" love. In essesnce this is no different from what happens in Iran or Saud country...only its not that rampant, and not state sponsored. Female infanticide is now showing up as terrible sex ratio in the adult population in many states, and you are still dreaming about how Islamism pissed on our culture, ignoring the fact that we are pissing every day on it.

    Women are treated far better in Hindu society than anywhere else in the world. Remember, there is no "right" without responsibility. A woman running around naked without restraint is no woman but a beast. Hindu women have the right sense of freedom with responsibility while maintaining traditions. All other societies swing to the extremes of no rights (muslim) or no responsibility (western).
    Can you give examples how women in hindu society have been treated better than any other soceity? Please don't fall back 3000 years into pre-history and epic. That don't serve any purpose. I am also bit confused about this responsibility thing. So if a woman is sensually dressed and our dicks respond, its the woman's fault? You will be glad to know this exactly the Islamic sharia logic, and also those so called hindu organizations of modern india.

    It is highly irksome when foreigners have the audacity to question "women's rights" of Hindus or Indian society. It is even worse when a Hindu does it.
    If we are unable to save us from ourselves, our narrow mindedness and hypcracies, we may as well stop worring about foreigners and "mlecchas", for there is no hope there then.
    What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    November 2007
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Age
    38
    Posts
    464
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Muslim Women's rights

    I'm sorry... NOT A SANCTION?

    The Vedas don't speak about beheading babies specifically, so I'm entitled to do it because the Vedas don't outspokenly forbid it?

    Isn't common sense that causing this amount of suffering to another being, forever hindering their bodily functions, would be sanctioned by the law of AHIMSA? Which is (or at least should be) an universal law? God!
    The Qur'an and Hadith say nothing about female gential mutilation - probably because it didn't exist at the time of Muhammad. It developed in Africa and is practiced there by non-Muslims as well as Muslims. I have read that the only kind of female "circumcision" that Islam allows is the removal of the clitoral hood to allow a woman to (supposedly) feel greater pleasure during sex.

    Women are treated far better in Hindu society than anywhere else in the world. Remember, there is no "right" without responsibility. A woman running around naked without restraint is no woman but a beast. Hindu women have the right sense of freedom with responsibility while maintaining traditions. All other societies swing to the extremes of no rights (muslim) or no responsibility (western).
    At least Islamic law states that a woman cannot be married against her will. The Hadith states:

    Khansa Bint Khidam said “My father married me to his nephew, and I did not like this match, so I complained to [Muhammad] the Messenger of Allah (May Allah bless him and grant him peace). He said to me “accept what your father has arranged.” I said “I do not wish to accept what my father has arranged.”

    He said “then this marriage is invalid, go and marry whomever you wish.” I said “I have accepted what my father has arranged, but I wanted women to know that fathers have no right in their daughter’s matters (i.e. they have no right to force a marriage on them). (Fathul Bari Sharah Al Bukhari 9/194, Ibn Majah Kitabun Nikah 1/602)

    The Hindu scriptures have no equivalent of this or any other verses stating that women may not be forced into marriages against their will. I understand that forced marriages do happen in Islamic countries, but at least there's something prohibiting it and the parents are breaking Islamic law if they force their daughter to marry a man she doesn't want to. As far as I know, there is no religious law prohibiting Hindu parents from forcing their daughter to marry someone she doesn't want to.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Muslim Women's rights

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    Yes it is the richest in terms of donations.There are different pujas ranging from few hundred bucks to as high as many thousands of rupees (i think it was 40k bucks). And the costliest pujas are booked for decades in advance. And I think nothing is free. So I am not sure how those who can't manage 3 square meals can manage the darshan, but in India people will go to any length to appease the Gods, yet won't do a single thing to develop better human values, so it ain't surprizing.
    "Human values"? Like what? Having 10 sexual partners and calling it "freedom"? Or is the "value" of divorcing your spouse at the drop of a hat and calling it "freedom" and "happiness"? Or is the values of protesting whaling but going home and eating beef? Please, enlighten me, pun not-intended, about these 'human values' that are absent in many Indian devotees according to you.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    Minsters looting taxpayers money 365 days a year donate pure gold crowns costing 40 crores, perhaves as a token penance (but to me seems more like a bribe to the lord). And I am not talking of Tirupati alone but all famous shrines where display of money and greed has taken almost epic proportions. Yet one may ask what does they do with this money? In the very hills lord resides on billions of rupees worth of gold, the poor cannot be protected from Christian conversion. Ofcourse govt controls everything, but why then we assume the Lord is in charge of everything? Is anyone bothered?
    Temples across India do many things with the donated money. They feed the poor and try to renovate the aging temples. Funny thing you mention that because the Indian govt., controlled by anti-Hindus, steal most of the money from the temples. Some temples are so broke they can't even afford a single priest and thus remain locked except for a day in the week.

    You don't seem to realize that donations, in the Hundi for example, are acts of selflessness. Most of these donations are done without expecting anything in return. As mentioned before, some people do it for selfish reasons but you cannot lump all devotees into the same category like that.

    I agree that more needs to be done in order to make people aware of the christian/muslim/pseudo-secular threat. Yet, many are doing just that selflessly. In fact, I just met someone a couple of months ago who quit his well-paying job here in Silicon Valley to return to India to help the poor acquire and keep farmland as well as renovate and rebuild temples. Yes, this is one person. But there are many more like him. RSS is the largest volunteer organization in the world. They were the first people to help the tsunami victims in 2004. They helped people regardless of religion/caste and didn't bait them with promises like the christian filth did. Many thousands support RSS. Yet, the dumb media in India and the anti-Hindu media outside, have the audacity to label the RSS as an "extremist" organization. LOL...

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    True most of the devotees are ordinary, but they also have to stand in ordinary lines, while those paying more get to stand in special lines. With no money you are out of luck to see the lord. This is abosutely appaling, and how much you want to defend it is not going to change the facts. Every person I know who has been to Thirupati and such shrines went for their desires to be fullfilled.
    Again you are mistaking the reason for such things. The 'special lines' and their fees go towards the temple proceeds. Ideally, the wealthier sections of society should give more towards the upkeep of the temples but if you don't give them anything in return, they are less likely to do so. Therefore, they are allowed to form different lines to get a 'darshan'.

    Have you been to Tirupati when there is a festival? I don't think standing in the 'regular' line is an option for many people; as long as they can afford not to. If they do it by Varna, there will be an uproar.

    And there are just as many people I know who go to Tirupati from around the world for nothing but penance and spirituality.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    Artha and Kama are necessary goals for any person, but to many hindu devotees they seem the only goal and they are not ashmed to blatantly display their power of money to get ahead in the appointment with Lord as well! What penance.
    This is a human condition more than a Hindu condition. Can you afford to eat at a five star hotel? If so, is it fair to expect you to eat at the tea-stall on the side of the street? Is it "wrong" to eat at a better restaurant? It is silly to think that just because some devotees pay more for a darshan, they are not doing it for selfless reasons. And, this practice is somewhat unique to Tirupati because of the immense crowds that gather there.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    This what happens when one only maintains the external decorum of religion and practices but are internally morally bankrupt.
    This is an arrogant and highly derogatory statement. How can you presume to know the moral wherewithal of the devotees of the temples in India? Is it not clear that the 10s of millions at the Kumbh Mela do it out of devotion and not just some selfish pursuit?

    It is hilarious what you say does apply to the abrahamic garbage though.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    I don't know why you need to fall back on pre-history when only 2 days back another women was mudered (now in Rajasthan) for "unlawful" love. In essesnce this is no different from what happens in Iran or Saud country...only its not that rampant, and not state sponsored. Female infanticide is now showing up as terrible sex ratio in the adult population in many states, and you are still dreaming about how Islamism pissed on our culture, ignoring the fact that we are pissing every day on it.
    All these problems are in no way related to "Hinduism". These are social issues that are unique to certain places. In iran or saudi, it is sharia or PISSlamic law that requires such punishment. This rotten influence is what made certain sections of Hindu society in India so rigid. In fact, this is why Sati became an issue a few centuries ago. All these social issues have no basis in Hindu Dharma. To even attempt to link the two, like the untouchable abrahamics do, is futile.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    Can you give examples how women in hindu society have been treated better than any other soceity? Please don't fall back 3000 years into pre-history and epic. That don't serve any purpose. I am also bit confused about this responsibility thing. So if a woman is sensually dressed and our dicks respond, its the woman's fault? You will be glad to know this exactly the Islamic sharia logic, and also those so called hindu organizations of modern india.
    Women in Hindu society have been treated well because of our innate respect for the motherly principle. A woman is an embodiment of patience, kindness, altruism, creativity, and serenity. Females that don't have these qualities are not women.

    In India, the role of womanhood revolved around grhstashrama. Thus, if she decided jumping off of a cliff or going "clubbing" and getting drunk would be adventurous (like some idiots way out west), she would be shunned. A woman whose focus remained on family and duty was always treated with enormous respect.

    And, don't give me this "its the woman's fault" garbage. If a female, again, not "woman", dresses like a whore, it is certainly not the fault of men to have a natural reaction. Modesty is something that should come for a woman naturally. If she is immodest, then don't shed any tears if she gets attacked.

    Quote Originally Posted by sm78 View Post
    If we are unable to save us from ourselves, our narrow mindedness and hypcracies, we may as well stop worring about foreigners and "mlecchas", for there is no hope there then.
    If the people in India acted according to Hindu Dharma, there would be no 'saving' needed. It is precisely because many Indians today have drifted away from Hindu traditions, that society is in shambles, especially in the cities.

    And, no worries about mlecchas is right. We have enough bullets for them.
    Last edited by TatTvamAsi; 20 October 2010 at 05:00 PM.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    January 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Muslim Women's rights

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottMalaysia View Post
    The Hindu scriptures have no equivalent of this or any other verses stating that women may not be forced into marriages against their will. I understand that forced marriages do happen in Islamic countries, but at least there's something prohibiting it and the parents are breaking Islamic law if they force their daughter to marry a man she doesn't want to. As far as I know, there is no religious law prohibiting Hindu parents from forcing their daughter to marry someone she doesn't want to.
    This is quite hilarious; humans, I mean Hindus, don't need everything stated in scriptures to follow unlike the abrahamic filth who need to be told "do not steal" etc.

    Plus, you should look at this fact as incredibly supportive of the high philosophy of Hinduism. Despite there being no such "law" or "rule", these things are very rare in Hindu society. Forced marriages are a modern phenomenon and occur only in extreme circumstances. It is most certainly not as frequent as you disingenuously imply.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •