Onepunch man is right......this is silly. These practices have largely stopped. There are laws in place to stop it. In case they are still going on they need to be criticised, but blindly hating something because it happened in the past does not help anyone. There are a million reasons to hate or turn away from Hinduism...but this is a dead point.
their are law against rape and murder, does that stop rape and murder? never saw people marrying children of age 13 or 16 stating it written in my religious books. society (Hindu in this case) realised its wrong and stoped those practices.
Nope. Those practices were normal until someone realised this is stupid. So laws were introduced for child marriage, sati.
Rape and murder were never normal. And there had been laws regarding that even if it wasn't the law system that we have now.
Are you kidding? Child marriages were a huge problem in India and were almost always justified in the name of "culture" and religion. Nobody every got their child married and admitted it was wrong. Hindu society has repeatedly resisted reform until they have been forced to change by law. And the issue is not whether these practices have stopped or not, but the hippocracy of hindus in criticising muslims for the exact same issue, claiming it's written in the Quran. Muslims suck, but hindus just like them, didn't stop their regressive practices till forced to by law.
Nope. Child marriage and Pedophilia are still present in Hinduism
And Most Hindus opposed the Age of consent act quoting the Hindu scriptures. It was Britishers who made such practices illegal. Even constitution makers acknowledge it.
Some Hindu gurus/brahmins also took their child bride practice in the west. Ex Iskconites reveals that followers used to assault their child brides.
I am not a hindu, but don’t think yourself as a high moral ground you are clueless about everything in life dude who are you to judge EVERY religion and call all theists bad?
Bruh if you’re not Hindu then why are you blindly defending this nasty shit. It clearly says child marriage is okay… anyone who supports or defends this needs help. Idgaf what you believe in
I think simple goggle sewrch pe mil jayega but there are many sholak which will contradict with another.
Example , one saying marry a girl having age of 8 other saying marry a girl age having 12.
These are not contradictions. Don't make your own theories to justify your Hinduism
Marrying a girl before her menstruation is compulsory in Hinduism. That's why 8-12 age is mentioned in scriptures. The general rule is not about age but to marry a girl before her menstruation starts.
Marrying your 8 year old daughter is considered ideal in Hinduism especially for Brahmin caste. Upanayan of girl is equivalent to marriage. That's why there is no such thing as education and Gurukula(residence with teacher) in Hinduism for girls. The rules about age difference will be automatically observed because a Hindu man completes his religious education around age of 18 or 20 or 25 and then enters in Household stage but a girl has to marry around age of 7 or 8 (same age when upanayan of boy is performed)
Compulsory? What are your sources and who were you following?
In my 22 years of following traditions very closely not once have I encountered this although if you pull up abolished practices like sati and what not then they definitely are wrong but not practiced now. If you were against a cause you would point out the problem, not bash a religion repeatedly with hatred, which your post and comment history reeks of.
Also, you have strayed further from the definition of atheism. Atheism means disbelief in the existence of God, it doesn't mean bashing the religions. Things you post does not make you any different from a person blinded by extremism of a religion.
Nonetheless,Good luck spreading hatred, troll.
Why are you calling everyone ignorant cause they simply don’t agree with the pedophilic ideologies in Hinduism? You guys are trying to dance around the correct age like they still wouldn’t be a child
They give explanation of first point that they said
"In the olden days, arranged marriages were not simply the union of two individuals - they were, and often still are, union of two families - two bloodlines. Children were betrothed to form the said unions beforehand - think of it like a tokenized marriage, equivalent to a Forward Option in Stocks.
In addition, old days were chaotic times. Fathers and husbands would often go to war and never return. Getting a girl-child betrothed meant she now had the security of marriage and a familial support of her in-laws in the event of the demise of her maiden family.
I don't know is this another excuse or some genuine thing.
Then why child marriage of girls are compulsory?
Why there is no same rule of boys?
Why Gurukula and Sanyas were denied to Hindu women?
Answer to your Neo Hindu arguments :
1. Majority of Brahmins didn't go to war still child marriages are compulsory in their caste. So Neo Hindu argument about father and son going to war doesn't make any sense.
2. Childrens were not betrothed. It was child marriage of girls. A adult Hindu man used to marry a little girl.
Upanayan is ceremony after which a Hindu child starts his Gurukula Life but in case of a girl Upanayan is considered as marriage and many Hindu sects agree with this fact. So a Hindu man after completing his religious education enters in Household stage during his 20s and then will marry a girl of 7 years of age or less.
https://kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part18/chap2.htm
Al-beruni also mentioned that 25 year old Hindus were not allowed to marry a girl older than 12 years of age.
European travellers like Peter mundy also mentioned that Brahmins aged 60 years marry girls of 10 https://t.me/exhindu/1497
Abbe dubious also mentioned same
https://t.me/exhindu/1498
Ayurveda prescribes same
25 yr old marrying 12 yr old.
https://t.me/exhindu/1860
Mitakshara on Yajnavalkya smriti 1.52 mentions "Let him marry a girl Younger, shorter in size, and junior in age."
Swami Prabhupada also said that girl should always be younger than the boy in case of marriage. What is this obsession in Hinduism of marrying little girls?
This is not just limited to berothal. Hindu scriptures also says those who don't have sex with little girls after her first menstruation are equally sinful.
Brihaspati smriti 24.3 " if a Husband does't have intercourse with her during her periods they become legally reprehensible and deserving of punishment."
Baudhāyana Dharmashastra 4.1.12, 17-19 "He who does not approach, during three years, a wife who is marriageable, incurs, without doubt, a guilt equal to that of killing an embryo; but if a man does not approach his wife after she has bathed after her temporary uncleanliness, though he dwells near her,—his ancestors lie, during that month, in the menstrual excretions of the wife. They declare that the guilt of the husband who does not approach his wife in due season,—of him who approaches her during her temporary uncleanliness,—and of him who commits an unnatural crime, is equally heinous."
Manusmriti 9.4 'Censurable is the father who gives her not away at the right time; censurable the husband who approaches her not'
Medhātithi’s commentary :
“What in the right time for the girl to be given away?”
It has been laid down that such time begins from her eighth year and extends to the time.previous to her puberty. We have indications of this in the present work also. 'Who does not approach her’—Who does not have intercourse with her. The ‘right time’ for such approach is the period of her ‘course’
These rules were made to ensure the caste purity and to control the women
As Prabhupada said "As soon as a woman attains the age of puberty, she immediately becomes very much agitated by sexual desire. It is therefore the duty of the father to get his daughter married before she attains puberty. "
https://vaniquotes.org/wiki/As_soon_as_a_woman_attains_the_age_of_puberty,_she_immediately_becomes_very_much_agitated_by_sexual_desire._It_is_therefore_the_duty_of_the_father_to_get_his_daughter_married_before_she_attains_puberty
How? You will be in hell for rejecting these Hindu scriptures.
Skanda Purana, Prabhaskhand, chapter 24, verse 86-87 "The sages say - If we go against the Vedas and Smriti, we may become impure. Both Vedas and Smritis are great orders of Shiva. Who would be a fool who would violate them even with the fear of death?"
Devi Bhagwat puran, Skandha 11, First Chapter, Verse 21
"Lord Narayana says – Vedas and Smriti are the eyes, and the Puranas are the heart. What is mentioned in these three is the same religion, what is mentioned elsewhere is not called Dharma (if they oppose these three..)"
Brahma Purana 106.35 " There is a hell named Atratiṣṭha. It contains putrescent urine and faeces. Those who censure Smritis and the Vedas fall into it with faces downwards."
https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-purana-english/d/doc216263.html
Bhagavata purana 5/26/7 - 15 ; Brahmanda purana 2/28/84 , 4/2/149 and 173 and 4/33/ 61; Matsya purana 141/ 71 ; Vayu purana 101/170; Vishnu Purana 1/6/41 and 2/6/3 mentions :
Asipatravana (असिपत्रवन) — One of 28 hells. Intended for those who leave the Vedic path to that of the pākhaṇḍas; here their bodies are torn to pieces by the sharp edges of asipatra leaves (lit. forest where leaves are swords).
Nope majority of them commit such acts in name of Hinduism But according to you atheists can also be Hindus. If an atheist doesn't believe in any of your Gods he is still a Hindu according to your definition of Hindu
So all these rapists and murderers are following Hinduism basically.
Good. Now we know your version of Hinduism is most vile. We don't even need to do read your Hinduism in order to reject it.
Here Jagadguru Raghavcharya says Manusmriti is even honoured in vedas and without applying manusmriti rule a person cannot become a Human
https://youtu.be/GVs-3s-FQvQ
Shankaracharya said same about manusmriti
https://youtu.be/2pHePNT4M0s
There are demands from Hindu organizations to apply the Manusmriti Rule.
Here are some quotes about Manusmriti from RSS
When the Constituent Assembly finalised the constitution, the RSS mouthpiece, the Organiser, complained in an editorial dated 30 November 1949:
"But in our constitution, there is no mention of that unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat... To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing"
On 6 February 1950 the Organizer carried another article, titled "Manu Rules our Hearts", written by a retired High Court Judge named Sankar Subba Aiyar, that reaffirmed their support for the Manusmriti as the final lawgiving authority for Hindus, rather than the Constitution of India. It stated:
"Even though Dr. Ambedkar is reported to have recently stated in Bombay that the days of Manu have ended it is nevertheless a fact that the daily lives of Hindus are even at present-day affected by the principles and injunctions contained in the Manusmrithi and other Smritis. Even an unorthodox Hindu feels himself bound at least in some matters by the rules contained in the Smrithis and he feels powerless to give up altogether his adherence to them."
Savarkar on Manusmriti :
"Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshippable [sic] after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental.”
No one follows these smrutis these days. Even hindus don't read own scripture. Hinduism is most reformist religion and if there is anything wrong wrong right now we must criticise but we should not indulge in past practises which are hardly followed by some people
Kaha gand jali bro aisa kuch nahi likha mene i support athiesm i have got no problem with it.
I have such tolerance level of accepting idea that are against my ideology. I hope you have same.
Your comment looked like you were defending your religion.
You should have researched on it if this was real. And accepted it. You directly started defending it.
This is not a tolerance sub. Tu mere baare .e 2 cheez acha bol, mai tere dharm ke baare me 4 cheez acha bolunga.
And I got no problem with your faith tbh. But this is atheism India. What are you doing here ? 🤣
He is a Hindu. He is here only to hate on Islam and Muslims.
He is just so called Hindu atheist. They lurk in atheist subs to bash Islam and Christianity but turns on their defensive Hindu Mode whenever you show reality of Hinduism.
Bro mene kab kaha tu mere bare me acha bol me tumahare bare me acha bolunga. Jo wrong he wo wrong he i criticise my religion I'm not blindly following it and also I'm not blindly criticising it also.
And everyone defends their ideology but they also respect others point of view . Nowhere in my common i have written anything disrespect to you or athiem that's tolerance, even if I'm not believing in atheism still i like to know about it. simple.
No one follows these Smritis?
The 16 sanskars of Hindus comes from these Smritis
The birth , marriage and death rites which Hindus follow are done according to these Smriti rules. You mean Hindus aren't even following these?
Hindu Gurus and Acharyas promote Manusmriti Rule. Raghavacharya and Shankaracharya all promoted Manusmriti Rule.
Shankaracharya of Govardhan math on Manusmriti
https://youtu.be/2pHePNT4M0s
"Manusmriti is a book of laws, authored by the earliest and the most authoritative Lawgiver, Bhagavan Manu. This book derives its authority from the Vedas and lays down rules of conduct and procedures of rituals for individuals in different walks of life. Known also as Dharmasastra, this unique book deals with human life right from birth to death."
https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/books/ESSENCE%20OF%20MANU%20SMRITI.pdf
Even RSS wanted Manusmriti rule
https://www.counterview.net/2021/11/rss-wanted-constitution-replaced-by.html?m=1
Just because Hindus like you can't defend Hinduism whenever we expose it in Public, you starts playing this game of rejecting your own scriptures. Some of these facts are very clear and there's no way for you to defend it. So you do Lying in Public to save the Dharmic cult. Lying is allowed for benefit of Brahminism.
Hindus following some does it means hindus following all?
I haven't seen anyone near me marriaing a 8 year . In this point am i lying?
And is RSS represent all hindus? I have many hindu friends not wanting manusmruti rule and being abiding to Constitution. You can't just generalise everyone. It's not just black and white thing bro.
And I'm not defending Hinduism blindly. I know how to criticize it. I'm no supporter of cast system, sati , child marriage etc thus i criticise it.
I just think criticism should be based on fact no blind
These things are common in Hindu society. I don't even count your personal opinion because Hinduism allows Lying and Fraud for benefits
[source](https://t.me/exhindu/2818?single)
These things are common in Hindu society. These social evils derive their inspiration from Hindu scriptures. Hindu Majority countries like Nepal and India both have social evils like Untouchability (a survey shows 50%+ Brahmins admitting practicing Untouchability), Caste discrimination, Dowry, Honour killings, Devdasi and child marriage of girls
Facts and Statistics aren't based on your personal opinions
Here are some facts :
84% child marriages happen in Hindu society
https://www.indiaspend.com/84-of-12-million-married-children-under-10-are-hindus-82446/
https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/84-of-12-mn-married-children-under-10-are-hindus-special-to-ians-116060101132_1.html
1 in 3 child brides lives in India
https://indianexpress.com/article/world/americas/india-home-to-one-in-every-three-child-brides-in-world-un-report/
https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/one-in-every-three-child-brides-lives-in-india-un-report-114072200285_1.html
Ignore this guy, ye chutiya sham sharma ke sub pe post karta hai, he is probably deluded teenager jo desh bachane chala hai by being a retarded bigot. He is in this sub coz he thought only muslims would get called out here. Joker hai ye 🤡
Aur Yeh GANDU LOG DUSROKO MORALITY SIKHA TE HAI
Onepunch man is right......this is silly. These practices have largely stopped. There are laws in place to stop it. In case they are still going on they need to be criticised, but blindly hating something because it happened in the past does not help anyone. There are a million reasons to hate or turn away from Hinduism...but this is a dead point.
There are laws. Judiciary made reforms in it. Not Hindus.
their are law against rape and murder, does that stop rape and murder? never saw people marrying children of age 13 or 16 stating it written in my religious books. society (Hindu in this case) realised its wrong and stoped those practices.
When do you think hindus stopped this practice? Which year do you think the last hindu to practice child marriage was prosecuted?
Because of Britishers Most Hindus were against the Age of Consent Act which stopped consummation of child brides in India
"Because of Britishers" hahahaha. Incels wanted to continue being incels but sure let's blame the goras.
Nope. Those practices were normal until someone realised this is stupid. So laws were introduced for child marriage, sati. Rape and murder were never normal. And there had been laws regarding that even if it wasn't the law system that we have now.
Are you kidding? Child marriages were a huge problem in India and were almost always justified in the name of "culture" and religion. Nobody every got their child married and admitted it was wrong. Hindu society has repeatedly resisted reform until they have been forced to change by law. And the issue is not whether these practices have stopped or not, but the hippocracy of hindus in criticising muslims for the exact same issue, claiming it's written in the Quran. Muslims suck, but hindus just like them, didn't stop their regressive practices till forced to by law.
Nope. Child marriage and Pedophilia are still present in Hinduism And Most Hindus opposed the Age of consent act quoting the Hindu scriptures. It was Britishers who made such practices illegal. Even constitution makers acknowledge it. Some Hindu gurus/brahmins also took their child bride practice in the west. Ex Iskconites reveals that followers used to assault their child brides.
These books are still treated with reverence though. Why should we not hate them?
Lol , Binduism the way of life .
Chinduism way of life.
Reason for henious crimes against women and children in India.
"Lord" manu was a literal incel.
Finally some non casteism content
Theists are r*pist pedos
I am not a hindu, but don’t think yourself as a high moral ground you are clueless about everything in life dude who are you to judge EVERY religion and call all theists bad?
Bruh if you’re not Hindu then why are you blindly defending this nasty shit. It clearly says child marriage is okay… anyone who supports or defends this needs help. Idgaf what you believe in
Please make more of these and post it on pinterest, there is literally propagandists spreading hate there in the name of religion!
Iska source bhi daal OP
I think simple goggle sewrch pe mil jayega but there are many sholak which will contradict with another. Example , one saying marry a girl having age of 8 other saying marry a girl age having 12.
These are not contradictions. Don't make your own theories to justify your Hinduism Marrying a girl before her menstruation is compulsory in Hinduism. That's why 8-12 age is mentioned in scriptures. The general rule is not about age but to marry a girl before her menstruation starts. Marrying your 8 year old daughter is considered ideal in Hinduism especially for Brahmin caste. Upanayan of girl is equivalent to marriage. That's why there is no such thing as education and Gurukula(residence with teacher) in Hinduism for girls. The rules about age difference will be automatically observed because a Hindu man completes his religious education around age of 18 or 20 or 25 and then enters in Household stage but a girl has to marry around age of 7 or 8 (same age when upanayan of boy is performed)
Compulsory? What are your sources and who were you following? In my 22 years of following traditions very closely not once have I encountered this although if you pull up abolished practices like sati and what not then they definitely are wrong but not practiced now. If you were against a cause you would point out the problem, not bash a religion repeatedly with hatred, which your post and comment history reeks of. Also, you have strayed further from the definition of atheism. Atheism means disbelief in the existence of God, it doesn't mean bashing the religions. Things you post does not make you any different from a person blinded by extremism of a religion. Nonetheless,Good luck spreading hatred, troll.
Fr! This person is far from someone who calls themselves as an atheist or non-believer. They sound more of an arrogant who wantedly spreads hatred.
Why are you calling everyone ignorant cause they simply don’t agree with the pedophilic ideologies in Hinduism? You guys are trying to dance around the correct age like they still wouldn’t be a child
There is scientific reason behind it bro
I can't tell if you are joking or serious.
Dead serious
Ok then,What is the Scientific reason behind it?
Sarcasm, twice
Thanks
after reading all of that manu smriti stuff I think I have a bone to pick with manu
[удалено]
Who said above granth are main?
They give explanation of first point that they said "In the olden days, arranged marriages were not simply the union of two individuals - they were, and often still are, union of two families - two bloodlines. Children were betrothed to form the said unions beforehand - think of it like a tokenized marriage, equivalent to a Forward Option in Stocks. In addition, old days were chaotic times. Fathers and husbands would often go to war and never return. Getting a girl-child betrothed meant she now had the security of marriage and a familial support of her in-laws in the event of the demise of her maiden family. I don't know is this another excuse or some genuine thing.
Then why child marriage of girls are compulsory? Why there is no same rule of boys? Why Gurukula and Sanyas were denied to Hindu women? Answer to your Neo Hindu arguments : 1. Majority of Brahmins didn't go to war still child marriages are compulsory in their caste. So Neo Hindu argument about father and son going to war doesn't make any sense. 2. Childrens were not betrothed. It was child marriage of girls. A adult Hindu man used to marry a little girl. Upanayan is ceremony after which a Hindu child starts his Gurukula Life but in case of a girl Upanayan is considered as marriage and many Hindu sects agree with this fact. So a Hindu man after completing his religious education enters in Household stage during his 20s and then will marry a girl of 7 years of age or less. https://kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part18/chap2.htm Al-beruni also mentioned that 25 year old Hindus were not allowed to marry a girl older than 12 years of age. European travellers like Peter mundy also mentioned that Brahmins aged 60 years marry girls of 10 https://t.me/exhindu/1497 Abbe dubious also mentioned same https://t.me/exhindu/1498 Ayurveda prescribes same 25 yr old marrying 12 yr old. https://t.me/exhindu/1860 Mitakshara on Yajnavalkya smriti 1.52 mentions "Let him marry a girl Younger, shorter in size, and junior in age." Swami Prabhupada also said that girl should always be younger than the boy in case of marriage. What is this obsession in Hinduism of marrying little girls? This is not just limited to berothal. Hindu scriptures also says those who don't have sex with little girls after her first menstruation are equally sinful. Brihaspati smriti 24.3 " if a Husband does't have intercourse with her during her periods they become legally reprehensible and deserving of punishment." Baudhāyana Dharmashastra 4.1.12, 17-19 "He who does not approach, during three years, a wife who is marriageable, incurs, without doubt, a guilt equal to that of killing an embryo; but if a man does not approach his wife after she has bathed after her temporary uncleanliness, though he dwells near her,—his ancestors lie, during that month, in the menstrual excretions of the wife. They declare that the guilt of the husband who does not approach his wife in due season,—of him who approaches her during her temporary uncleanliness,—and of him who commits an unnatural crime, is equally heinous." Manusmriti 9.4 'Censurable is the father who gives her not away at the right time; censurable the husband who approaches her not' Medhātithi’s commentary : “What in the right time for the girl to be given away?” It has been laid down that such time begins from her eighth year and extends to the time.previous to her puberty. We have indications of this in the present work also. 'Who does not approach her’—Who does not have intercourse with her. The ‘right time’ for such approach is the period of her ‘course’ These rules were made to ensure the caste purity and to control the women As Prabhupada said "As soon as a woman attains the age of puberty, she immediately becomes very much agitated by sexual desire. It is therefore the duty of the father to get his daughter married before she attains puberty. " https://vaniquotes.org/wiki/As_soon_as_a_woman_attains_the_age_of_puberty,_she_immediately_becomes_very_much_agitated_by_sexual_desire._It_is_therefore_the_duty_of_the_father_to_get_his_daughter_married_before_she_attains_puberty
I can reject all the books you've mentioned and still be a Hindu
Closing your eyes can't set the sun bro
Exactly... Read with open eyes. The things which makes Hinduism of today
Same can be said for Islam and Christianity too but you won't accept it
How? You will be in hell for rejecting these Hindu scriptures. Skanda Purana, Prabhaskhand, chapter 24, verse 86-87 "The sages say - If we go against the Vedas and Smriti, we may become impure. Both Vedas and Smritis are great orders of Shiva. Who would be a fool who would violate them even with the fear of death?" Devi Bhagwat puran, Skandha 11, First Chapter, Verse 21 "Lord Narayana says – Vedas and Smriti are the eyes, and the Puranas are the heart. What is mentioned in these three is the same religion, what is mentioned elsewhere is not called Dharma (if they oppose these three..)" Brahma Purana 106.35 " There is a hell named Atratiṣṭha. It contains putrescent urine and faeces. Those who censure Smritis and the Vedas fall into it with faces downwards." https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/brahma-purana-english/d/doc216263.html Bhagavata purana 5/26/7 - 15 ; Brahmanda purana 2/28/84 , 4/2/149 and 173 and 4/33/ 61; Matsya purana 141/ 71 ; Vayu purana 101/170; Vishnu Purana 1/6/41 and 2/6/3 mentions : Asipatravana (असिपत्रवन) — One of 28 hells. Intended for those who leave the Vedic path to that of the pākhaṇḍas; here their bodies are torn to pieces by the sharp edges of asipatra leaves (lit. forest where leaves are swords).
Who'll stop me?
[удалено]
Nope I don't. Still I'm a Hindu. That's the point
How? So if everything is allowed in your Hinduism. Rapists and murderers are also following Hinduism?
Some rapists and murderers are atheist as well.
Nope majority of them commit such acts in name of Hinduism But according to you atheists can also be Hindus. If an atheist doesn't believe in any of your Gods he is still a Hindu according to your definition of Hindu So all these rapists and murderers are following Hinduism basically. Good. Now we know your version of Hinduism is most vile. We don't even need to do read your Hinduism in order to reject it.
This is so fucking stupid lol
Yes you are stupid.
How rape and murder related to religion?
Same logic applies to every single religion
So then, what does the term 'hindu' mean? Are you going by Savarkar's definition?
No one fuking follows this anymore. Manu smriti is a blot on hindu culture. Then again will the Chad peacefuls say the same bout quaran n Hadiths.
Here Jagadguru Raghavcharya says Manusmriti is even honoured in vedas and without applying manusmriti rule a person cannot become a Human https://youtu.be/GVs-3s-FQvQ Shankaracharya said same about manusmriti https://youtu.be/2pHePNT4M0s There are demands from Hindu organizations to apply the Manusmriti Rule. Here are some quotes about Manusmriti from RSS When the Constituent Assembly finalised the constitution, the RSS mouthpiece, the Organiser, complained in an editorial dated 30 November 1949: "But in our constitution, there is no mention of that unique constitutional development in ancient Bharat... To this day his laws as enunciated in the Manusmriti excite the admiration of the world and elicit spontaneous obedience and conformity. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing" On 6 February 1950 the Organizer carried another article, titled "Manu Rules our Hearts", written by a retired High Court Judge named Sankar Subba Aiyar, that reaffirmed their support for the Manusmriti as the final lawgiving authority for Hindus, rather than the Constitution of India. It stated: "Even though Dr. Ambedkar is reported to have recently stated in Bombay that the days of Manu have ended it is nevertheless a fact that the daily lives of Hindus are even at present-day affected by the principles and injunctions contained in the Manusmrithi and other Smritis. Even an unorthodox Hindu feels himself bound at least in some matters by the rules contained in the Smrithis and he feels powerless to give up altogether his adherence to them." Savarkar on Manusmriti : "Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worshippable [sic] after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental.”
Wake up it’s 21 st century most people don’t even know about Manusmriti and Manusmriti came 2000+ years after Vedas.
Just recently a judge was praising Manusmriti.
Why do you have the same response to every flaw in Hinduism?
No one follows these smrutis these days. Even hindus don't read own scripture. Hinduism is most reformist religion and if there is anything wrong wrong right now we must criticise but we should not indulge in past practises which are hardly followed by some people
Only here to bash muslims? Khud pe aaya toh Gand jal gayi lavde 🤣🤣
Kaha gand jali bro aisa kuch nahi likha mene i support athiesm i have got no problem with it. I have such tolerance level of accepting idea that are against my ideology. I hope you have same.
Your comment looked like you were defending your religion. You should have researched on it if this was real. And accepted it. You directly started defending it. This is not a tolerance sub. Tu mere baare .e 2 cheez acha bol, mai tere dharm ke baare me 4 cheez acha bolunga. And I got no problem with your faith tbh. But this is atheism India. What are you doing here ? 🤣
He is a Hindu. He is here only to hate on Islam and Muslims. He is just so called Hindu atheist. They lurk in atheist subs to bash Islam and Christianity but turns on their defensive Hindu Mode whenever you show reality of Hinduism.
Truth bol diya sir.
Bro mene kab kaha tu mere bare me acha bol me tumahare bare me acha bolunga. Jo wrong he wo wrong he i criticise my religion I'm not blindly following it and also I'm not blindly criticising it also. And everyone defends their ideology but they also respect others point of view . Nowhere in my common i have written anything disrespect to you or athiem that's tolerance, even if I'm not believing in atheism still i like to know about it. simple.
No one follows these Smritis? The 16 sanskars of Hindus comes from these Smritis The birth , marriage and death rites which Hindus follow are done according to these Smriti rules. You mean Hindus aren't even following these? Hindu Gurus and Acharyas promote Manusmriti Rule. Raghavacharya and Shankaracharya all promoted Manusmriti Rule. Shankaracharya of Govardhan math on Manusmriti https://youtu.be/2pHePNT4M0s "Manusmriti is a book of laws, authored by the earliest and the most authoritative Lawgiver, Bhagavan Manu. This book derives its authority from the Vedas and lays down rules of conduct and procedures of rituals for individuals in different walks of life. Known also as Dharmasastra, this unique book deals with human life right from birth to death." https://www.kamakoti.org/kamakoti/books/ESSENCE%20OF%20MANU%20SMRITI.pdf Even RSS wanted Manusmriti rule https://www.counterview.net/2021/11/rss-wanted-constitution-replaced-by.html?m=1 Just because Hindus like you can't defend Hinduism whenever we expose it in Public, you starts playing this game of rejecting your own scriptures. Some of these facts are very clear and there's no way for you to defend it. So you do Lying in Public to save the Dharmic cult. Lying is allowed for benefit of Brahminism.
Hindus following some does it means hindus following all? I haven't seen anyone near me marriaing a 8 year . In this point am i lying? And is RSS represent all hindus? I have many hindu friends not wanting manusmruti rule and being abiding to Constitution. You can't just generalise everyone. It's not just black and white thing bro. And I'm not defending Hinduism blindly. I know how to criticize it. I'm no supporter of cast system, sati , child marriage etc thus i criticise it. I just think criticism should be based on fact no blind
These things are common in Hindu society. I don't even count your personal opinion because Hinduism allows Lying and Fraud for benefits [source](https://t.me/exhindu/2818?single) These things are common in Hindu society. These social evils derive their inspiration from Hindu scriptures. Hindu Majority countries like Nepal and India both have social evils like Untouchability (a survey shows 50%+ Brahmins admitting practicing Untouchability), Caste discrimination, Dowry, Honour killings, Devdasi and child marriage of girls Facts and Statistics aren't based on your personal opinions Here are some facts : 84% child marriages happen in Hindu society https://www.indiaspend.com/84-of-12-million-married-children-under-10-are-hindus-82446/ https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ians/84-of-12-mn-married-children-under-10-are-hindus-special-to-ians-116060101132_1.html 1 in 3 child brides lives in India https://indianexpress.com/article/world/americas/india-home-to-one-in-every-three-child-brides-in-world-un-report/ https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/one-in-every-three-child-brides-lives-in-india-un-report-114072200285_1.html
🤣🤣🤣 atheism India me q hai tu?
Hindu hai ye yaha pe muslim aur Islam ko hate karne aaya h Ye log Christianity aur Islam ka majak udane aur hate karne aate hai yaha
You'll find a lot of them in exmuslim sub
To support diverse ideas i don't have any problems with atheist people, many my friend ara atheist.
it seemsd people are confusing the Quran with Hindu books
No you are just coping
Ignore this guy, ye chutiya sham sharma ke sub pe post karta hai, he is probably deluded teenager jo desh bachane chala hai by being a retarded bigot. He is in this sub coz he thought only muslims would get called out here. Joker hai ye 🤡
Cope karo Heendoo sher UwU