She is Taliban and this Guy is very Smart Indian taliban

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

viduur wrote:ManuSmiriti was only a Brahminical manipulation of later times. It has become so much maligned that most conservative Brahminists will not dare to touch it. Dr. Ambedkar burnt the copies of Manu Smiriti in a symbolic gesture to display its gross irrelevance for the modern Hindu Society. Sri Sri Ravishankar also say the same thing in following words:
The Sanskrit term smriti refers to those practices that are appropriate to time and place, those things that are time-bound.
------On the issue of Cow slaughter/ Beef, non-Hindus of India also respect Hindu feelings to a large extent. UP has a very large population of Muslims, but they do not press for their right to eat Beef. Thus it is a matter of consensus in case of many states. What is wrong if Muslims of UP "sacrifice their right to eat beef" to honor the feelings of their Hindu brothers. Hindus are also not pressing for having a 'common civil code' for the Muslims. Things may change in future. To understand the functioning of a democracy, democratic spirit ( give & take) is essential.
Manusmrithi seems to be the only Hindu law book which prohibits one from killing a cow. Again, it only prohibits a Hindu from doing so, and not a non-Hindu. If Manusmrithi is now supposedly abandoned by Hindus, why should they even continue to try to impose cow killing prohibition, in this modern world, that also upon minorities. Minorities obviously are not killing cows to offend Hindus, but only to consume its meat. If they can do so in private in a slaughter house, why should Hindus bother? It seems as I said, Hindus scoff at manusmrithi in public but follow it neverthless. Don't you think it is time for Hindus to live upto the spirit of secularism and show magnanimity to minorities especally when they are not killing cows to offend Hindus. I know cow slaughter is permitted in states with a substantial christian minority. If Hindus in those states can live with the situation, why can't they do that in other states?

User avatar
Maersk
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:32 pm
Location: Mecca

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Maersk »

Good old Indian Politics of inclusiveness that is never too far away from the heart of an Indian.

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Yohan wrote:Manusmrithi seems to be the only Hindu law book which prohibits one from killing a cow. Again, it only prohibits a Hindu from doing so, and not a non-Hindu. If Manusmrithi is now supposedly abandoned by Hindus, why should they even continue to try to impose cow killing prohibition, in this modern world, that also upon minorities.
I think rHindu's everence for Cow is pre-dated than Manu Smriti. Krishna clearly preferred for Go-Vardhan Puja instead of wasting resources in the Yajnas. There are many stories related to Nandini & Kamdhenu Cow, which are predated to Ramayana. There was a war between Vashistha & Haihaya on the issue of Possesion of Nandini cow. Above all there is Mr. Nandi, the Big Bull, the vehicle of great God Shiva, linked to Pre-Vedic civilisation even ( Mohan -Jo -Daro).Although I always believe, Hinduism can not be caged into some outdated provisions or traditions.
Yohan wrote:Minorities obviously are not killing cows to offend Hindus, but only to consume its meat. If they can do so in private in a slaughter house, why should Hindus bother?
Incidentally Muslims used mainly Cow to ignite Communal riots all thru 20th century( during pre & post partition eras). The used to throw limbs of Cows in the temples even to offend the Hindu feelings, so that Communal riots are triggered. In last 2 decades, such incidents have receded but now there is RSS factor, which is complicating the issue. In 2002, the VHP/Bajrang Dal activists lynched 5 dalits, who were carrying carcass of dead cow for tanning purposes.

http://www.ambedkar.org/News/News102202.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's why I say RSS is not a Hindu NGO but only a anti-hindu NGO, who still think Dalits are worst than some pets & insects even. But what one can do except exposing them in a democratic society. Law forbids me to teach them a perfect lesson, otherwise I would have taught many lessons so far for polluting the Hindu phil by their dirty & sick mentality.
Yohan wrote:It seems as I said, Hindus scoff at manusmrithi in public but follow it neverthless.
ManuSmiriti was made popular by Sir Jones only, who translated it into English, so that British Judges have a fair ideas of it. Although In British India also, Hindus followed numerous local & community laws than the laws of Manu Smiriti. I bought Manu Smiriti in sometime after 2000 only, and found it as much disgusting as much the Koran is. Many verses were followed by a warning of the Publishers(It apears to be adultrated). There is no authenticity about the laws of Manu Smiriti. They kept on changing till very late ( may be upto 15th/ 16 th century). I don't think we have any manuscript older than 500 years old.
Yohan wrote:Don't you think it is time for Hindus to live upto the spirit of secularism and show magnanimity to minorities especally when they are not killing cows to offend Hindus. I know cow slaughter is permitted in states with a substantial christian minority. If Hindus in those states can live with the situation, why can't they do that in other states?
Incidentally I worked on a Livestock survry & Dairy Dev Project of GoI in 1999-2000, and found that if the Slaughter of old & unproductive cattlestock was obstructed then it will lead not only to the loss of productivity in animal husbandry & dairying Indusrty but will also result into many kind of other problems. But then No Hindu farmer keep the older & unproductive cattles. They just sell it to a middleman for a price. Middleman sell these to unauthorised slaughter houses within the state or export them to other states, where slaughter is permitted. If no Cow is slaughtered in India then you will find Cows are ruling everywhere(in the Parliament even). Cow slaughter is going on, but India is not getting full benefits of trading in beef products. Not only the Secularism, but there are many practical & economic reasons in favor of allowing Cow slaughter & dealing in beef products. But what can one do, when the politics of Religion & Caste is the main curse of India.
Last edited by viduur on Mon May 11, 2009 6:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Infidel
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:12 am
Location: Earth

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Infidel »

Yohan wrote: Manusmrithi seems to be the only Hindu law book which prohibits one from killing a cow. Again, it only prohibits a Hindu from doing so, and not a non-Hindu. If Manusmrithi is now supposedly abandoned by Hindus, why should they even continue to try to impose cow killing prohibition, in this modern world, that also upon minorities. Minorities obviously are not killing cows to offend Hindus, but only to consume its meat. If they can do so in private in a slaughter house, why should Hindus bother? It seems as I said, Hindus scoff at manusmrithi in public but follow it neverthless. Don't you think it is time for Hindus to live upto the spirit of secularism and show magnanimity to minorities especally when they are not killing cows to offend Hindus. I know cow slaughter is permitted in states with a substantial christian minority. If Hindus in those states can live with the situation, why can't they do that in other states?
Meet your meat :ermm:

You don't need to follow Manusmriti in Hindusim, an average Hindu doesn't even know what Manusmriti is. Many Hindu people who eat meat will happily include beef. But others refrain from it just because animal slaughter for food is not acceptable for them in an ethical sense. Its not just cows but various other creatures which are revered by Hindus.

I don't eat meat because I cannot accept slaughtering an animal for food. Another reason is that I have lived and played with some of these creatures during my childhood. I learned unconditional caring and love from these so called creatures. So there is a better reason not to harm them.

Personally I don't care if you eat meat or not , but just look at my avatar and tell me would you slaughter that creature ?

And the laws are more of a political issue, it differs from place to place. Somewhere people eat dogs and at some places they eat alive octopuses. You know the culture defines law sometime. If people feel need then laws can be changed in democracy.

Stop trolling for no obvious reason when you know that there are no time bound hard an fast rules defined in Gita. Its not a doctrine unlike other religions.
Monotheism is a gift from the gods.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

viduur wrote:I think Hindu's everence for Cow is pre-dated than Manu Smriti. ------ManuSmiriti was made popular by Sir Jones only, who translated it into English, so that British Judges have a fair ideas of it. Although In British India also, Hindus followed numerous local & community laws than the laws of Manu Smiriti. I bought Manu Smiriti in sometime after 2000 only, and found it as much disgusting as much the Koran is. Many verses were followed by a warning of the Publishers(It apears to be adultrated). There is no authenticity about the laws of Manu Smiriti. They kept on changing till very late ( may be upto 15th/ 16 th century). I don't think we have any manuscript older than 500 years old..
Manusmrithi is as old as Gita. There is enough evidence in history which tells that Hindus ate meat including beef in earlier times. There are various theories about how cow slaughter prohibition came about. The only convincing one seems to be competition from Buddhism in those days. But Buddhists eat all kinds of meat including beef now.

Though Manusmrithi as a text was hardly ever read by ordinanry Hindus, it was transmitted culturally from one generation to the next at all times among Hindus. Hindu kingdoms in southern India, never conquered by Muslims, were ruled with the laws of Manusmrithi. People in those kingdoms knew what those laws were, though they never read it. This situation is no more different today. How many Indians do you think have read the Indian constitution and its laws?

What British did was to translate it into English for their use. In doing so they popularised it among those who learned English. It stopped being a Brahmin Sanskrit monopoly.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

Infidel wrote:You don't need to follow Manusmriti in Hindusim, an average Hindu doesn't even know what Manusmriti is. Many Hindu people who eat meat will happily include beef. But others refrain from it just because animal slaughter for food is not acceptable for them in an ethical sense. Its not just cows but various other creatures which are revered by Hindus..
Many have said here that there is no hard and fast rule in being a Hindu, and that one can eat beef and be an equally good Hindu. (I know it is a modern Hindu attitude, and runs counter to the teachings of Hinduism.) In any case, let that be the case. Then why should Hindus have laws in the books to prevent cow slaughter in the name of religion? To intimidate minorities?

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Yohan wrote:
viduur wrote:I think Hindu's everence for Cow is pre-dated than Manu Smriti. ------ManuSmiriti was made popular by Sir Jones only, who translated it into English, so that British Judges have a fair ideas of it. Although In British India also, Hindus followed numerous local & community laws than the laws of Manu Smiriti. I bought Manu Smiriti in sometime after 2000 only, and found it as much disgusting as much the Koran is. Many verses were followed by a warning of the Publishers(It apears to be adultrated). There is no authenticity about the laws of Manu Smiriti. They kept on changing till very late ( may be upto 15th/ 16 th century). I don't think we have any manuscript older than 500 years old..
Manusmrithi is as old as Gita.
MahaBharata & Gita are at least 500 older to Chankya times. Chankya treatises also have no mention of Manu Smiriti & Chankya did not opted to become King of Magadh. He remained a Brahmin & guide in old traditions. Chankya times clearly proves the existence of Old mobile Varna System, becoz the Kings of Nanda & Mauryan dyansties came from Lower(Shoodra) category.

ManuSmiriti was compiled when Hinduism ( Sanatana Dharma) was facing the double challenge- from the Brahminism from inside, and from the Budhism on the outside. Buddhism lost steam & direction during the last Mauryan emperor BrihdaRath, and for the first time a Brahmin named as PushyaMitra became the King( approx 100BC). During PushyaMitra's time, Brahminism held full sway on Hinduism (SD), and scriptures like Manu Smiriti etc were created and older scriptures have been manipulated to ensure supremacy of Brahmins. The 30-40 castes mentioned in Manu Smiriti also confirm the very late origin of Manu Smiriti. But Manu Smiriti had many versions or amendments therafter becoz it was more a LAW BOOK than a pious religious scripture.
Yohan wrote:That was the time when There is enough evidence in history which tells that Hindus ate meat including beef in earlier times. There are various theories about how cow slaughter prohibition came about. The only convincing one seems to be competition from Buddhism in those days. But Buddhists eat all kinds of meat including beef now.
Ban on Cow slaughter itself prove the fact that cow slaughter & beef eating was popular at some point of time. But it was definitely predated to Krishna's times. Krishna definitely reverred cow too much.
Yohan wrote:Though Manusmrithi as a text was hardly ever read by ordinanry Hindus, it was transmitted culturally from one generation to the next at all times among Hindus. Hindu kingdoms in southern India, never conquered by Muslims, were ruled with the laws of Manusmrithi. People in those kingdoms knew what those laws were, though they never read it. This situation is no more different today. How many Indians do you think have read the Indian constitution and its laws?
But we know very well that now there are no Kingdoms & Zamindari in India. We also know that all Indians are treated at par before the law, and are controlled by those Laws, which are passed by Parliament & not by the Laws mentioned in Manu Smiriti or Bible etc.Muslims are exceptions, they are privilaged citizens. There are very severe punishments for calling by the Caste names in case of SC/STs. Hindus have already consigned Manu Smiriti to dust bin becoz it was just a Lawbook, and not a religious scripture. When we have a different Lawbook now, then it serves no practical purpose. It serves the purpose of researchers only now, and has become useless for priests even. Priests have hundreds of other Smiritis to do their job.
Yohan wrote:What British did was to translate it into English for their use. In doing so they popularised it among those who learned English. It stopped being a Brahmin Sanskrit monopoly.
No Doubt. Whatever may be the Intentions of Britishers in studying & translating the Hindu Scriptures, but ultimately it proved very beneficial to the Hinduism & Hindu Society

Idesigner
Posts: 1867
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Idesigner »

Yohan wrote:
Manusmrithi seems to be the only Hindu law book which prohibits one from killing a cow. Again, it only prohibits a Hindu from doing so, and
Yohan:

We discussed lot about Manusmriti in old forums. I quoted chapters and verses. Anyone who wants to discuss smriti should visit old forum. Our new forum moderators may trash whole thread if we continue here.

Manusmriti did not ban cow eating. Its allowed as long as its done as a part of ceremony, yagnas, shradhas etc. If Brahmin refuses such meat he will go to hell!! My kind of everyday is steak day brahmins!! :D

Eating any kind of meat for fun , back yard barbeque or with liquor was prohibited. Ofcourse Manu preferred vegetarianism for al occassions except religious one.

Manusmriti must be pretty old ( atleast some chapters) or must predate Gupta period or even Jain-Budhhist period when lots of people got tired of steak a day kind of animal scarifice. :D Too bad who should get tired of juicy metas.

Dear Vidur,

Bedside Ramayan & Geeta, Vedant & Upanishadas deeply affected Hindu religious ideas. Almost everything about soul, supersoul, soul migration and numerous ideas of present day Hinmduism comes from Vedas & Upanishadas, ofcourse belifes of one layer on another.

Present day Hinduism and especially temple worship , cow worship, extreme obedience to laddu khau brahmins came from numerous Purans.circa about Maurya period to 11th century A.D.

Id.

User avatar
Infidel
Posts: 129
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2009 6:12 am
Location: Earth

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Infidel »

Yohan wrote: Many have said here that there is no hard and fast rule in being a Hindu, and that one can eat beef and be an equally good Hindu. (I know it is a modern Hindu attitude, and runs counter to the teachings of Hinduism.) In any case, let that be the case. Then why should Hindus have laws in the books to prevent cow slaughter in the name of religion? To intimidate minorities?
Yeah, it is true that Hinduism does not restrict you with a hardliners routine. The analogy of several rivers taking different path but all reaching the same ocean works well for it.

If I were a King, I could have laid down a set of laws with the help of scholars and pundits naming it closer to other holy scriptures according to my preferences. It wouldn't have taken too long to set it de facto standard throughout the generations.
It is believed that Manusmriti was composed much later during Kushan period, about 100 years after Chankya/Kautilya. Arthur A. Macdonnel ,Principal, Oxford College (born in Patna, Bihar) in his book 'A History of Sanskrit Literature' (1899 AD) estimates that Manusmriti in its present form was composed near about 200 AD, Yajnavalkya Dharma Sutra in 350 AD, Mitaksara in 1100 AD, Parasar Smriti in 1300 AD and Dayabhag in 1500 AD.

In his book, Macdonnel (page 366) warns that the smritis are not on the same footings as law books of other nations as these are works of private individuals (Brahmins); these were written by Brahimins for benefit of Brahinins whose caste pretentions these books consequently exaggerate. Further, none of these books from Manusmriti onwards were approved by any Dharam Sansad (religious congregation). Macdonnel advises, it is, therefore, important to check statements/claims made in smrities by outside sources.

But, British Indian Courts neglected this advice of Macdonnel. Further, the original text of Manusmriti has been tampered with was acknowledged by Sir William Jones, an employee of the East India Company who arbitrarily elevated it as the Law book of Hindus in British Indian Courts. Bertrand Russel in his book, Power, has traced from prehistoric times that priestly class used religious beliefs and practices to accumulate power and wealth. In medieval times, kings used to rule in many European countries at pleasure of Catholic Pope. Papal approval was a must for ascending thrones in Europe. So, priestly class acquiring power in name of religion was there in other societies also.
Monotheism is a gift from the gods.

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Idesigner wrote:Manusmriti did not ban cow eating. Its allowed as long as its done as a part of ceremony, yagnas, shradhas etc. If Brahmin refuses such meat he will go to hell!! My kind of everyday is steak day brahmins!! :D
Even the Manu Smiriti allow Beef eating, I never knew.I think this should make Yaohan Happy. :D
Idesigner wrote:Present day Hinduism and especially temple worship , cow worship, extreme obedience to laddu khau brahmins came from numerous Purans.circa about Maurya period to 11th century A.D.

Id.
That's very true. Brahmins were in full control after the fall of Mauryan empire.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

Dating many ancient Hindu texts had been a difficult to historians, but there is a consensus. (Many Hindutva types like to date them to pre-stone age times, for obvious reasons.) I accept only dates generally accepted by academic scholars. In many cases these dates have a range of couple of hundred years. In some cases dates vary based upon first version and the final version.

Gita and Manusmrithi belong to the same general period, circa beginning of Christian era, give a couple of hundred years either way. Mahabharata is older than Gita as the latter is a later interpolation into Mahabaratha. Though Krishna as a character is pre Gupta, Krishna-cow cult is of post Gupta period.

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Infidel wrote:
It is believed that Manusmriti was composed much later during Kushan period, about 100 years after Chankya/Kautilya. Arthur A. Macdonnel ,Principal, Oxford College (born in Patna, Bihar) in his book 'A History of Sanskrit Literature' (1899 AD) estimates that Manusmriti in its present form was composed near about 200 AD, Yajnavalkya Dharma Sutra in 350 AD, Mitaksara in 1100 AD, Parasar Smriti in 1300 AD and Dayabhag in 1500 AD.

In his book, Macdonnel (page 366) warns that the smritis are not on the same footings as law books of other nations as these are works of private individuals (Brahmins); these were written by Brahimins for benefit of Brahinins whose caste pretentions these books consequently exaggerate. Further, none of these books from Manusmriti onwards were approved by any Dharam Sansad (religious congregation). Macdonnel advises, it is, therefore, important to check statements/claims made in smrities by outside sources.

But, British Indian Courts neglected this advice of Macdonnel. Further, the original text of Manusmriti has been tampered with was acknowledged by Sir William Jones, an employee of the East India Company who arbitrarily elevated it as the Law book of Hindus in British Indian Courts. Bertrand Russel in his book, Power, has traced from prehistoric times that priestly class used religious beliefs and practices to accumulate power and wealth. In medieval times, kings used to rule in many European countries at pleasure of Catholic Pope. Papal approval was a must for ascending thrones in Europe. So, priestly class acquiring power in name of religion was there in other societies also.
I think this addresses all the questions regarding origin & relevance of Manu Smiriti in a very convincing & conclusive manner.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

viduur wrote:
Idesigner wrote:Manusmriti did not ban cow eating. Its allowed as long as its done as a part of ceremony, yagnas, shradhas etc. If Brahmin refuses such meat he will go to hell!! My kind of everyday is steak day brahmins!! :D
Even the Manu Smiriti allow Beef eating, I never knew.I think this should make Yaohan Happy. :D
That is 'Idesigner' going nuts. Punishment for killing a cow in Hindu kingdoms was death, till British started ruling. That was the law.

Brahmins were the law makers and also the king makers. Without their rituals, no one would become a king.

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Yohan wrote:
viduur wrote:
Idesigner wrote:Manusmriti did not ban cow eating. Its allowed as long as its done as a part of ceremony, yagnas, shradhas etc. If Brahmin refuses such meat he will go to hell!! My kind of everyday is steak day brahmins!! :D
Even the Manu Smiriti allow Beef eating, I never knew.I think this should make Yaohan Happy. :D
That is 'Idesigner' going nuts. Punishment for killing a cow in Hindu kingdoms was death, till British started ruling. That was the law.

Brahmins were the law makers and also the king makers. Without their rituals, no one would become a king.
I can recall only the spirit only of an scripture, and not the texts.

I think everything was OK for Brahmins incl the Beef as per the spirit of Manu Smiriti.

However for others, strict punishments may have been there on kicking cows, what to think of killing.

It was grossly biased in favor of one particular caste, therefore, it was summarily rejected, when an Indian Sansad ( Parliament) came into existence. Kindly also remember, Constituent Assembly had the majority of Brahmins, which passed the Indian Constitution.

But why Britishers loved it so much, I failed to understand always.

Idesigner
Posts: 1867
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Idesigner »

Yohan wrote:
viduur wrote:
Idesigner wrote:Manusmriti did not ban cow eating. Its allowed as long as its done as a part of ceremony, yagnas, shradhas etc. If Brahmin refuses such meat he will go to hell!! My kind of everyday is steak day brahmins!! :D
Even the Manu Smiriti allow Beef eating, I never knew.I think this should make Yaohan Happy. :D
That is 'Idesigner' going nuts. Punishment for killing a cow in Hindu kingdoms was death, till British started ruling. That was the law.

Brahmins were the law makers and also the king makers. Without their rituals, no one would become a king.
HI sUPER NUT OR NUTTO -NUT MAHAMAHO -MAHOPADHYAYA,

Yes it was punishable by death for even brahmins if done for enjoyment. No backyard slaugtering cows.

I was not joking. To Manu it was serious matter. To refuse offering of yagya prasad of cow meat was sin.I refuse to quote verse here. See those quotes from manusmriti. Those were the days when Manu wanted to codify behavior of upperccaste hindus. Many descriptions of drunkenness, meat eating partying are found in epics . Even there were descriptions of liquor bars, girls, bar bouncer in sanskrit literature. Later day smritikar frownwed upom such un-Aryan behavior. All societies sooner or later made frigging prudish laws once they settled down, had some means.; like what was right and what was not right. Ancient Jews were known for many goofy laws, ditto for Catholics, even muslims became lot stricter once they had some means to implement sharis. same about southern gemtleman or souther ladies!! All about whether to invite nggrs in house who can screw nggr woman, and ban for white lady to scre nggr man!! :heh: Sameway south African whites invented a whole system of aparthied post 1948.

Manu made laws about what to drink and what not to, who to invite in house and who not to, what kind of gatherings noble Arya allowed to go and where not to go, who to make friends and who not to and ofcourse had to say about who to marry and who not to to, what knd of marriages allowed etc.

Id.

Dear Vidur,

Manu was consitenet about what constitute good behavior of noble castes. There were no double standards. Sometime the standards and bar was set high for Brahmins.

Id.
Last edited by Idesigner on Mon May 11, 2009 7:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.

viduur
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 4:55 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by viduur »

Actually the Brahmins of India are still most smart people. They will dump Brahminical BJP/RSS & will pick up a dalit like "Mayawati", if she is going strong.

But if Manu Smiriti has become tainted then they will not touch it. They have full concern for the sensebilities of their customers (Yajmans).

Our 75 years old Panditjee ( he is learned, was a Sanskrit teacher & Principal of Some Govt High School) never miss a chance to discuss religious topics with me, becoz it helps him into his business of Purohitgiri. He is interested in expanding his business & clients only, and not in the non-sense of Manu Smiriti if it does not suit to his business.
Last edited by viduur on Mon May 11, 2009 7:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

viduur wrote:It was grossly biased in favor of one particular caste, therefore, it was summarily rejected, when an Indian Sansad ( Parliament) came into existence. Kindly also remember, Constituent Assembly had the majority of Brahmins, which passed the Indian Constitution.

But why Britishers loved it so much, I failed to understand always.
Brahmins (not all) were one of the first people who began to accept the enlightenment and modernity brought in by the British in India. It was not all smooth sailing as there were multiple minor rebellions, and one major one, before accepting such changes. 'British Residents' posted in all the far corners and kingdoms in India made sure that the subcontinent was making progress to that end. Slowly but surely this endless effort resulted in the Hindus being weaned out of manusmrithi, a task which still is not complete.

Yohan
Posts: 2272
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Yohan »

viduur wrote:Actually the Brahmins of India are still most smart people. They will dump Brahminical BJP/RSS & will pick up a dalit like "Mayawati", if she is going strong.

But if Manu Smiriti has become tainted then they will not touch it. They have full concern for the sensebilities of their customers (Yajmans).

Our 75 years old Panditjee ( he is learned, was a Principal of Some Govt High School) never miss a chance to discuss religious topics with me, becoz it helps him into his business of Purohitgiri. He is interested in expanding his business & clients only, and not in the non-sense of Manu Smiriti if it does not suit to his business.
"Smart' is probably not the right word. A better fit would be 'clever'. Connivingly clever!

Brahmins wrote all the ancient Hindu texts, and then duped Hindus into believing a couple actually had been written by Dalits. I pity those Hindus dumb enough to believe such lies, and fall for such Brahmin traps.

Agnostic
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:58 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Agnostic »

Yohan wrote:Dating many ancient Hindu texts had been a difficult to historians, but there is a consensus. (Many Hindutva types like to date them to pre-stone age times, for obvious reasons.) I accept only dates generally accepted by academic scholars. In many cases these dates have a range of couple of hundred years. In some cases dates vary based upon first version and the final version.

Gita and Manusmrithi belong to the same general period, circa beginning of Christian era, give a couple of hundred years either way. Mahabharata is older than Gita as the latter is a later interpolation into Mahabaratha. Though Krishna as a character is pre Gupta, Krishna-cow cult is of post Gupta period.
Who gave the Gita? What is the date of bith of Krshna?
No one is sure of Chrsitan era because no one is sure of birth of Christ!

Agnostic
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:58 am

Re: She wants to understand Taliban., Indian Lady Arundhati Roy

Post by Agnostic »

[
Last edited by Agnostic on Mon May 11, 2009 9:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply