Hinduism Exposed! A religion which violates HUMAN RIGHTS!

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

Hinduism is the largest among Pagan religions. It is also a religion, which violates human rights and discriminate women indiscriminately. Class system in Hinduism is a core issue that matters. Which has resulted in the world largest population of poor and illiterate people.

Some not all of the issues, which are problematic in Hinduism, are:

Lack of a Common System
Caste System
Superiority of the Brahman
Polytheism
Sex and Sex-Worship
Authority of the Veda

Let us discuss that what will be the best solution for Hindu and India to eradicate this 5000 years old human tragedy once for all and forever? What is your take on it?

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

2

Oh gosh! Hinduism has sex in it. How sinful. Hindus immediately convert to religions which do not have have sex to get entry in heaven to have sex with various 'hoors' over there or enjoy ur stay on earth and try to have it here.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited April 02, 2000).]

3

BREAKING THE ICE :)

Hindu and Hinduism

The term 'Hinduism' has been derived from 'Hindu'. 'Hindu' is a Persian word which means dark 1 ]. The word was first used by Muslims 2 ] for the inhabitants of the 'land beyond the Indus (Sindhu) river' and later, for the ancient Indians in general. The word was never used in Indian literature or scriptures before the advent of Muslims to India 3 ]. According to Jawaharlal Nehru, the earliest reference to the word 'Hindu' can be traced to a Tantrik book of the eighth century C.E., where the word means a people, and not the followers of a particular religion. The use of the word 'Hindu' in connection with a particular religion is of very late occurrence 4 ]. The Muslim rulers used the term 'Hindu' to mean Indian non-Muslims only. The Brahmans gladly welcomed it as it brought all the non-Muslim Indians under a single umbrella and thus provided them with a rare opportunity to expand their social, religious and political influence over them in the name of religion. The British rulers maintained it with one modification. They excluded the converted Christians from those covered by the term 'Hindu'.
The non-Muslim people of the South Asian subcontinent called Hindu had no precise word for their religions 5 ]. They were, as they are, divided into thousands of communities and tribes, each having its own religious beliefs, rituals, modes of worship, etc. Finding it difficult to get the names of the religions of these communities, the British writers gave them the word "Hinduism" to be used as a common name for all of their religions in about 1830 6 ]. Thus the people called Hindus got a common element, at least in word, to be identified as a distinct, single community.

The people called Hindu have nothing common in their religious affairs. 'Hinduism', therefore, cannot give any precise idea as to what it means. Attempts were made to define the term but could not succeed. Faced with this dilemma, Hindu scholars sometime use the word Sanatan Dharma (eternal religion) and sometime Vedic Dharma (religion of the Veda), etc. for their religion. But as names of their religion, these words are also untenable as they do not imply anything precise for all the people called Hindu.

Main Features

Hinduism is a bundle of many things, often mutually contradictory. It is, therefore, not easy to identify its main features. However, some elements which are generally regarded as its main features are given below.

Lack of a Common System

Hinduism is not a revealed religion and, therefore, has neither a founder nor definite teachings or common system of doctrines 7 ]. It has no organization, no dogma or accepted creeds. There is no authority with recognized jurisdiction. A man, therefore, could neglect any one of the prescribed duties of his group and still be regarded as a good Hindu. "Hinduism has never prepared a body of canonical scriptures or a common prayer book; it has never held a general council or convocation; never defined the relation between laity and clergy; never regulated the canonization of saints or their worship; never established a single centre of religious life; never prescribed a course of training for its riests." 8 ] In the words of S.V. Kelkar, "There is in fact no system of doctrines, no teacher, or school of teaching, no single god that is accepted by all the Hindus." 9 ] In Hinduism, none is, therefore, regarded to have forsaken his or her religion, even if he or she deviates to any extent from the usually accepted doctrines or practices.

Caste System

Hindu society is divided into several thousands of caste and sub-caste. Caste is a highly organized social grouping. A Hindu is born in a caste and dies as a member of that caste. As caste is determined by birth, one can never move from one caste to another. Castes are not equal in status but arranged in a vertical order in which one caste is at the top and is the highest (the Brahman), another at the bottom and is the lowest (the Dalit) and in between them there are the Kshatriya, the Vashya and the Sudra in a descending order. This inequality in status is said to be an outcome of a person's deeds (good or bad) accomplished in his previous life. Caste differences find their expression largely in connection with marriages and eating together. In the words of S.D. Theertha, "... the Hindu social order is simply a menace to freedom, unity and peace. The three thousands and odd castes and the larger number of sub-castes, into which the Hindus are irretrievably divided, keep nearly ninety-five per cent of the Hindus in perpetual disgrace and permanently condemned to an inferior social status 10 ]. More on Caste System.

Superiority of the Brahman

The Brahmans occupy the highest position in the hierarchy of the caste system. They are said to have sprung from the mouth of Brahma (god), they are the rightful possessors of the Veda. They possess spiritual superiority by birth. They have the monopoly right to act as priests, conduct religious ceremonies and festivals, and accept alms. The Brahman is the deity on earth by his divine status 11 ]," born to fulfil dharma. Whatever exists in the world is his property. On account of the excellence of his origin, he is entitled to all. "Let a Brahman be ignorant or learned, still he is a great deity. To Brahman, the three worlds and the gods owe's their existence." 12 ] (emphasis added). More on Brahman from Hindu Scriptures.

Polytheism

Hindus believe in many gods and goddesses. Some of them are human (e.g. Krishna, Rama 13 ]), some animals (e.g. fish, monkey, rat, snake), (some animal-humans as in the case of Ganesh who has the head of elephant with trunk and the body of a human), and some others are natural phenomena (e.g. dawn, fire, sun). Their number is generally believed to be 330 million. According to Hindu belief, god incarnates, i.e., takes the form of human being and other animals and appears in this earth in that form. Gods and goddesses were born like human beings and had wives and children. No god possesses absolute power; some of the gods are weaker than the sages and some others even weaker than the monkey (e.g. Rama). Another aspect about Hindu gods is that the status of their godhood is not fixed. One finds that some gods were worshipped for a time and then abandoned and new gods and goddesses were adopted instead. The gods and goddesses worshipped now-a-days in Hindu homes and temples are not Vedic. The Vedic gods like Agni (fire), Surya (sun) Usha (dawn) are completely rejected and the gods and goddesses mentioned in the Puranas are worshipped by modern Hindus. Similarly, Rama who is currently receiving increasing acceptance among Hindus in India because of the wide propagation of the official and other media was never worshipped as a deity until the eleventh century.

Sex and Sex-Worship

Hindu scriptures are essentially pornographic in nature, full of sexual allusion, sexual symbolism, passages of frank eroticism and stories relating to venal love. Some religious sects even introduced ritual intercourse as part of their cult and a potent aid to salvation 14 ]. The rituals, festivals and ceremonies are characterized by the display of obscene portraits, sex and sex-worship. The temples, places of pilgrimage and other holy shrines are full of sculptures with all sorts of sexual postures. The sexual life of Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu, is well-known for its indecency. He had illicit relations with Radha, wife of his maternal uncle, in addition to a number of milk-maids, although he had a large number of wives 15 ]. Among Hindu gods, the most prominent ones are: Brahma (the creator), Vishnu (the sustainer) and Siva (the destroyer). Brahma is found guilty of cohabiting with his own daughter, Saraswati. It is for that reason that he is deprived of being worshipped. Vishnu is guilty of deceitfully ruining the chastity of a married woman, called Tulasi. Siva is not worshipped but the image of his linga (sex-organ) is widely worshipped. This is because of the curse of some sage 16 ]. In the sculpture, Siva and his consort Parvati are depicted in various explicit poses of the sexual act. Prostitution is encouraged in the form of religious custom of devdasi (slave-girls dedicated to temple-idols). Hindu gods and rishis (sages) are found engaged in sexual act with beautiful women and breeding illegitimate children. As for instance, in order that Rama could have strong soldiers in his army, the gods engaged themselves in begetting powerful sons. This they did by engaging themselves, in the words of Dr. Ambedkar 17 ], "in wholesale acts of fornication, not only against apsaras, who were prostitutes, not only against the unmarried daughters of Yashas 18 ] and nagas, but also against the lawfully wedded wives of Ruksha, Vidhyadhar, Ghandharvas, Kinnars, and Vanaras (monkeys) and produced the vanaras who became the associates of Rama" 19 ].

Authority of the Veda

It is generally believed that the Veda is recognized as an absolute authority in Hinduism but the so-called low- caste (non-Aryan) Hindus have no access to the scripture because they are considered impure by birth. So the Veda is far from being an authority for these people. The only people who are allowed to read and listen to the scripture are the Aryan Hindus. The Brahmans, the sole custodians of the Veda, too hardly benefit from it because it is written in Sanskrit, a dead language, 'its content has long been practically unknown to most Hindus, and it is seldom drawn upon for literal advice' 20 ].
References

[l] Firuz al-Lughat (Lahore: n.d.), p. 615. Also see Lugat Sa'idi: (Kanpur: 1936), p. 633.
[2] H.G. Rawlinson, Intercourse Between India and the Western World, (Cambridge: 1926), p. 20.
[3] Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics (ERE), (New York: l 967), 6:699. Also see Swami Dharma Theertha, History of Hindu Imperialism, (Madras: 1992), p. vii.
[4] Jawaharlal Nehru, The Discovery of India, (New Delhi: 1983), pp.74-75.
[5] Benson Y. Landis, World Religions, (New York: n.d.), p. 49.
[6] The New Encyclopaedia Britannica (NEB), 20:581.
[7] Richard F. Nyrof, Area Handbook for India, (Washington: 1975), p. 163.
[8] ERE. 6:7 12.
[9] Theertha, p. 177.
[10] Ibid., p.209.
[1l] Wilkins: Modern Hinduism, (London: 1975), p.239.
[12] Theertha, p. 37.
[13] Hindu zealots demolished the historic Babari Masjid on 6 December 1992 in order to construct a temple on its site for Rama.
[14] A.L Basham, The Wonders That Was India (Calcutta: 1967), p. 172.
[15] The number of his wives was sixteen thousand one hundred and eight (16,108) and his children numbered one hundred and eighty thousand (180,000). See Ambedkar, Riddle of Rama and Krishna, (Bangalore: 1988), p.25.
[16] See Chapter 4.
[17] Dr. Ambedkar was the first law minister of independent India and was the author of India's constitution.
[18] Yaksha, naga, ruksha, vidyadhar, gandharva, kinna, each of these words means demigod.
[19] Ambedkar, p.7.
[20] NEB, 20: 581.

NOTE: PLEASE PUT FORWARD YOUR SOURCES (FOR OR AGAINST) AND REFERENCES. IF YOU SIMPLY POSTED YOUR OPINION, THERE WILL BE NO RESPONSE FROM ME. I'LL MOVE FORWARD TO ESTABLISH MY POINT FURTHER.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

4

....

[This message has been edited by Roman (edited April 02, 2000).]

5

[quote]
Originally posted by 2PaK:
Ghazi,
.
[/quote]

Azkar and Roman are too busy to see/read it. I am glad that you did what you said you did.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

[This message has been edited by Ghazi (edited April 02, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Roman (edited April 02, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Roman (edited April 03, 2000).]

6

More on Hinduism Exposed

**Caste System **

The most significant feature of the Hindu social system is what is called 'caste' under which the people are divided into various groups. The status of an individual in the society is determined by the caste in which he is born. A Hindu is born in a caste and he dies as a member of that caste. There is no Hindu without a caste and being bound by caste from birth to death, he becomes subject to social regulation and tradition of the caste over which he has no control.

A person born in a caste carries the name of that caste as a part of his surname 1 ]. The division of the people into various castes is said to be eternal so that no act of virtue or vice in this earthly life is enough to make any change in the caste or social status of a man or woman. The caste system of India has generally been regarded as an absurd, unhealthy social phenomenon, without parallel elsewhere in the world.

On the top of the caste hierarchy is the Brahman and at the bottom is the Untouchable (Dalit) and in between are the Kshatriya, the Vashya, and the Sudra in a descending order. According to the Hindu scriptures, the Brahmans have been sprung from the mouth of Brahma (Hindu god), the Kshatriyas from his arms, the Vashyas from his thigh and the Sudras from his feet.

Broadly, Hindus are divided into two groups: caste Hindus (also varna Hindus) and low-caste Hindus. The former includes the Brahman, the Kshatriya and the Vashya who are the descendants of the fair-skinned Aryan invaders and the latter includes the Sudras, who are dark in skin and are the offspring of the original inhabitants of India. In this group is also included the most unfortunate Dalit who is outcaste because he falls outside the original fourfold groupings. He is untouchable because his touch is bound to pollute the other castes and that is why he must always remain at a sufficient distance from them.

The fourfold division is not the end of the caste system; the community is subdivided into thousands of sub-castes (gotras). According to a survey undertaken by the Anthropological Survey of India during 1985-92, those who are called Hindu are divided among 2,800 unique communities. The so-called low-caste Hindus are officially divided into three broad groups, namely Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes. According to this survey, these groups are subdivided into 450, 461, and 766 distinct communities respectively 2 ].

The great distinctions of caste are to be maintained not only in the earthly life, but also after death. According to Markandaya Purana, after death, the virtuous Brahman goes to the abode of Brahma, the good Kshatriya to that of Indra, the worthy Vashya to that of the Maruts, and the dutiful Sudra to that of the Gandharvas 3 ]. Apparently, the Untouchable (Dalit) does not deserve any place in any heaven, may be because of his untouchability.

Origin of the Caste System

'Caste' is a Portuguese word, used by the Portuguese as equivalent of 'varna' (a Sanskrit word, which means 'colour'). They used this word to designate the peculiar system of religious and social distinction which they observed among those who are called Hindu. Caste originally was a colour-bar, and in India, as later in America, served at first to separate free men from slaves. Gradually, the Brahmans made it a religiously ordained social fabric for the Hindu society. Manu, a Brahman, gave in his book, Dharma shastra, details about the caste system.

When the fair-skinned Aryans invaded India, about two thousand years before Jesus Christ (pbuh), they defeated the dark-skinned indigenous people, Dravidians, who were the founder of the Indian Civilization. The Aryans subjugated them, learnt many things from them and built up another civilization which came to be known as the Ganges Valley or Hindu Civilization. To perpetuate the enslavement of the original inhabitants of India, the Aryans created the caste system, and thereby excluded them from their own society with the name of Sudra (which means slave).

In the words of S.W. Theertha, "When the ancient priests set themselves up as an exclusive caste of Brahmans in order to establish their self-assumed superiority, they had to inflict degradation on all other Hindus (i.e., original Indians) and press them down to various layers of subordination. They had to keep the people divided, disunited, weak and degraded, to deny them learning, refinement and opportunities of advancement, and permanently and unalterably to tie them down to a low status in society. The Hindu social organization based on hereditary castes was evolved by the Brahmans with the above object and was enforced on the people with the help of foreign conquerors." 4 ]

Caste Determines Duty

In Hindu community, the basic duty of every individual is determined by his caste. The Brahman is the rightful possessor of the Veda and is the chief of the whole creation. He has the exclusive right to become a priest. It is through his benevolence that other mortals enjoy life.

The Khsatriya is described as the dispenser of justice, particularly as the one whose duty it is to punish law-breakers; he exercises the civil power and to his tender mercies the Brahmans could hand over law- breakers. He has to see that the various castes attend to their prescribed duties; but in doing this work he must abide by the decisions of the Brahmans.

The Vashya comprises the merchant, the agriculturist, and the keeper of cattle. His chief work is keeping cattle.

The Sudra has been created to serve the other three castes (i.e., the fair-skinned Aryans). "He is spoken of as a slave, his property, as well as his person, being at the disposal of his master." 5 ]

The Untouchable (Dalit) is to perform the most unpleasant tasks: cleaning lavatories, carrying night soil, skinning carcasses and making footwear.

Social, Economic and Other Aspects

The social, economic and other aspects of life are controlled by the caste regulation. Caste differences are largely invoked while arranging marriages and eating together. For rural Indians, castes shape almost every aspect of their lives: the food they eat and who can cook it; how they bathe; the colour of their clothes; the length of a sari (cloth worn by a woman); how the dhoti (cloth worn by a Hindu man) is tied; which way a man's moustaches are trained and whether he can carry an umbrella. Everything is determined by caste and nothing is left to chance.

Caste regulations formulated by Manu are discriminatory in nature; they favour the Aryan Hindus and discriminate against the so-called low-caste Hindus. In teaching the duties of the 1ow-caste people concerning marriage, Manu declares that a man aged thirty may marry a girl of twelve, and a man of twenty-four years may marry a girl of eight. He, however, is very particular about the marriage regulations of Brahmans. A Brahman must avoid marrying a girl whose family has produced no sons, that which has thick hair on the body, or is afflicted with hereditary disease. Let him choose for his wife a girl whose form has no defect, who has an agreeable manner, who walks gracefully like a young elephant, and whose body has exquisite softness 6 ].

Punishment for offence is also determined by discriminatory caste regulations. A crime against a man of his own caste by a Sudra is venial offence; but a similar offence committed against a man belonging to so- called higher caste is proportionately greater. If a Sudra through pride dares to give instructions to priests concerning their duty, hot oil will be dropped into his mouth and ears. A high-caste man having intercourse with a Sudra woman is to be banished; a Sudra having intercourse with a woman of the superior castes is to be put to death. Whatever a Brahman's offence, the king must on no account put him to death; he may, at the most, banish him, allowing him to take his property with him. Further, in case of wrongdoing against him, a Brahman need not approach the civil court, he is free to take vengeance upon the offender 7 ].

References

[1] Swami Dharma Theertha, History of Hindu Imperialism, Madras, 1992, p. 187.
[2] Dalit Voice, 15:4, p. 20.
[3] John C. Oman, The Brahmans, Theists, and Muslims of India, Delhi, 1973, p. 50.
[4] Theertha, p.1 64.
[5] Wilkins, Modern Hinduism, London, 1975, p. 247.
[6] Ibid., p. 196.
[7] See Wilkins, 1975, pp. 239-40; Oman, p. 52.

NOTE: WHO CAN REFUTE ME? MORE...

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

7

In the Name of Allah, most Compassionate, most Merciful

Hinduism Exposed

Brahmins always criticise, condemn and mock other Religions. Their criticisms and mocking is unreasonable and unacceptable.

In his autobiography, Dr. Charles an american scholar says that it is very simple to define a Hindu. He says a Hindu. he says a Hindu means "one who believes anything and everything if said in the name of God and shall never question its authenticity.

NOTE: WE CALL THAT PERSON A MORON.

The Brahmins claim that Lord Rama is incarnated (came in human form) to study and understand the difficulties of mankind. Is it really necessary for a god to incarnate HImself?? Can he not understand his creation? Why should God become a donkey or cockroach in order to understand the sufferings of these creatures?

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

8

In the Name of Allah, most Compassionate, most Merciful

Who are the Brahmins?

The word Brahmin incorporates all the upper-caste Hindus of India. They claim that, because they were made God Brahma's head, they are the chosen people of God. Worshipping a Brahmin is akin to worshipping God incarnate. Servinf a Brahmin and offering him alms is like serving God himself. These are in the beliefs that are included in the minds of all other people, especially in the low caste Hindus. As a result 5% of the Indian population have psychologically enslaved the other 95%.
The Brahmins are the "ARYANS" invaders of India who entered the country thousands of years ago via the Khyber Pass. Over the centuaries they have established themselves firmly on Indian soil by ruling over, and enslaving, the country's original inhabitants

Divisions Among the Brahmins

In Southern India the main divisions among Brahmins are the Ayyars and the Ayyangers. A through study of these two groups will give the reader the correct knowledge of their gods, writings, families, culture and above all, the centuaries old concealed rivalry between them for power and influence.
The Ayyars are, by physical composition, the more direct descendants of the Aryans invaders. They have fair complexions, long noses and other physical characteristics of Germans.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

9

*In the Name of Allah, most Compassionate, most Merciful *

Famous Indian writer embraces Islam

Khaleej Times 12/12/1999

Renowned bilingual writer and poetess Madhavikutty, popularly known as Kamala Das in the English literary world, yesterday embraced Islam and adopted the Muslim name Surayya.

The surprise announcement was made by the Cochin-based writer at a seminar organised by the Kerala State Library Council in Cochin.

Daughter of the late V.M. Nair, former managing editor of widely-circulated Malayalam daily Mathrubhumi and renowned poetess Nalappat Balamani Amma, a celebrated Malayalam writer, Madhavikutty, 67, told a news agency that she had decided to embrace Islam on her own volition. The desire to convert to Islam had blossomed 27 years ago when she had adopted two Muslim boys in Mumbai, she said. Mother of three sons, including well-known journalist M.D. Nalappad, former editor of Mathrubhumi and former resident editor of The Times of India in Bangalore, Madhavikutty said she felt that Islam would bring the much needed solace to her life.

Madhavikutty has won many literary awards, including the Vayalar Award in 1997 and the Asan Prize in 1985. Several of her works in English have been included in the curriculum of many foreign universities. My Story is considered as one of her masterpieces.

Madhavikutty said that she had a special liking for Islam for the past three decades and had a lot of affection for Muslim brethren. She said that she had looked after several Muslim children while she lived in Mumbai 27 years ago. She lives in Cochin. After shifting to Kerala, she had been associated with several human rights activities and has been contributing articles to Malayalam dailies.

Subhaan Allah :)

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

10

Mr Extreme got himself a new nick!

How about joining me in bashing the human rights violation our Islam has committed upon fellow muslims, both women and non-sunnis; human rights violation against non-muslims:hindus & christian.

Your buddy,
aDbul malick

[This message has been edited by Roman (edited April 02, 2000).]

11

zzzzpppp

memememe

hehehehe :):):):):)

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

12

i think aiyangars are fairer and ayyars are richer. CV Raman, Chandrashekhar, Ramanujan were Aiyyars while Jayalalitha, Sridevi are iyengars. Both of the have similar shape of nose. In fact I know plenty Iyengars who do not have particularly long nose. But they are fairer. Most of south Indian actresses are iyengars (except hema malini and some otehrs, maybe queer can tell us more.)
i do not see anything similar to germans in them.

13

In the Name of Allah, most Compassionate, most Merciful

Hindu Women VS Muslim Women

The Brahmins make a big campaign that Islam restricts the freedom of women. Let us compare the positions of the Hindu woman and the Muslim woman. See the following facts for comparison and then try to bring these Brahmins to their senses.

The Hindu Woman:

  1. The Hindu Woman has no right to divorce her husband.

  2. She has no property or inheritance rights.

  3. Choice of partner is limited because she can only marry within her own caste; moreover her horoscope must match that of the intending bridegroom/family.

  4. The family of the girl has to offer an enormous dowry to the bridegroom/family.

  5. If her husband dies she should commit Sati (being cremated with her dead husband). Since today's law forbids Sati, society mainly punishes her in other "holy" ways (see below).

  6. She cannot remarry.

  7. The widow is considered to be a curse and must not be seen in public. She cannot wear jewelry or colourful clothes. (She should not even take part in her children's marriage!)

  8. Child and infant marriage is encouraged.

The Muslim Woman:

1.The Muslim woman has the same right as the Muslim man in all matters including divorce.

  1. She enjoys property and inheritance rights. (Which other religion grants women these rights?). She can also conduct her own separate business.

  2. She can marry any Muslim of her choice. If her parents choose a partner for her, her consent must be taken.

  3. The dowry in Islam is a gift from a husband to his wife (not the other way around as is practiced by some ignorant Muslims).

  4. A Muslim widow is encouraged to remarry, and her remarriage is the responsibility of the Muslim society.

6.Mixed marriage is encouraged and is a means to prevent racism creeping in society.

  1. A Muslim mother is given the highest form of respect.

What right do the Hindus have to criticize the Muslims? Have you ever heard of a Muslim burning his wife? In India women die daily of dowry deaths, Hindu women being burnt by the husband or in-laws. It is a fact that upper caste Hindus ill-treat their women. The Brahmins are trying to claim that Muslims do not give freedom to their women. I ask you again. "Do the Hindus respect their women?"

You be the judge.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

14

On one hand u say Hinduism is not a single set of practices and then u go on to tell a set of Hindu practices which are common to all in ur opinion.

Give me an honest reply. If u r abroad, u must have come across many Indian and Hindu women. Do u think a Muslim women from Arabia or whatever is more free than a Hindu woman?

15

[quote]
Originally posted by ZZ:
**On one hand u say Hinduism is not a single set of practices and then u go on to tell a set of Hindu practices which are common to all in ur opinion.

Give me an honest reply. If u r abroad, u must have come across many Indian and Hindu women. Do u think a Muslim women from Arabia or whatever is more free than a Hindu woman?**
[/quote]

Muslim women at large is more FREE with all the RIGHTS regardless where she is than a Hindu women. I am an American Muslim, I lives in USA. I have been in India and have studied India extensively.

In future please use facts or I'll ignore your posts. You simply cannot sumup the facts I posted in few lines. I don't answer assumptions and I don't respond opinions. Issues/cases/matters are not decided by the nature of opinions, emotions, or sentiments. They are decided by the nature of evidence. The evidence shows that Muslim women have rights and Hindu women don't. Case closed. By the way I did not mention all the rights Muslim women have.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

[This message has been edited by Ghazi (edited April 02, 2000).]

16

In the Name of Allah, most Compassionate, most Merciful

My experiances and how I find that Islam does not oppress women
by Sister Noor

I came from a purely Hindu family where we were always taught to regard ourselves (i.e. women) as beings who were eventually to be married off and have children and serve the husband - whether he was kind or not. Other than this I found that there were a lot of things which really oppressed women, such as:

  • If a woman was widowed, she would always have to wear a white sari (costume), eat vegetarian meals, cut her hair short, and never re-marry. The bride always had to pay the dowry (bridal money) to the husband's family. And the husband could ask for anything, irrespective of whether the bride would have difficulty giving it.

  • Not only that, if after marriage she was not able to pay the full dowry she would be both emotionally and physically tortured, and could end up being a victim of "kitchen death" where the husband, or both the mother-in-law and the husband try to set fire to the wife while she is cooking or is in the kitchen, and try to make it look like an accidental death. More and more of these instances are taking place. The daughter of a friend of my own father's had the same fate last year!

  • In addition to all this, men in Hinduism are treated literally as among the gods. In one of the religious Hindu celebrations, unmarried girls pray for and worship an idol representing a particular god (Shira) so that they may have husbands like him. Even my own mother had asked me to do this. This made me see that the Hindu religion which is based on superstitions and things that have no manifest proof , but were merely traditions which oppressed women could not be right.

Subsequently, when I came to England to study, I thought that at least this is a country which gives equal rights to men and women, and does not oppress them. We all have the freedom to do as we like, I thought. Well, as I started to meet people and make new friends, learn about this new society, and go to all the places my friends went to in order to "socialise" (bars, dance halls, etc.). I realised that this "equality" was not so true in practice as it was in theory.

Outwardly, women were seen to be given equal rights in education, work, and so forth, but in reality women were still oppressed in a different, more subtle way. When I went with my friends to those places they hung out at, I found everybody interested to talk to me and I thought that was normal. But it was only later that I realised how naove I was, and recognised what these people were really looking for. I soon began to feel uncomfortable, as if I was not myself: I had to dress in a certain way so that people would like me, and had to talk in a certain way to please them. I soon found that I was feeling more and more uncomfortable, less and less myself, yet I could not get out. Everybody was saying they were enjoying themselves, but I don't call this enjoying.

I think women in this way of life are oppressed; they have to dress in a certain way in order to please and appear more appealing, and also talk in a certain way so people like them. During this time I had not thought about Islam, even though I had some Muslim acquaintances. But I felt I really had to do something, to find something that I would be happy and secure with, and would feel respected with. Something to believe in that is the right belief, because everybody has a belief that they live according to. If having fun by getting off with other people is someone's belief, they do this. If making money is someone's belief, they do everything to achieve this. If they believe drinking is one way to enjoy life then they do it. But I feel all this leads to nowhere; no one is truly satisfied, and the respect women are looking for is diminishing in this way.

In these days of so called "society of equal rights", you are expected to have a boyfriend (or you're weird!) and to not be a virgin. So this is a form of oppression even though some women do not realise it. When I came to Islam, it was obvious that I had finally found permanent security. A religion, a belief that was so complete and clear in every aspect of life. Many people have a misconception that Islam is an oppressive religion, where women are covered from head to toe, and are not allowed any freedom or rights. In fact, women in Islam are given more rights, and have been for the past 1400 years, compared to the only-recently rights given to non-Muslim women in some western and some other societies. But there are, even now, societies where women are still oppressed, as I mentioned earlier in relation to Hindu women.

Muslim women have the right to inheritance. They have the right to run their own trade and business. They have the full right to ownership, property, disposal over their wealth to which the husband has no right. They have the right to education, a right to refuse marriage as long as this refusal is according to reasonable and justifiable grounds. The Qur'an itself, which is the Word of God, contains many verses commanding men to be kind to their wives and stressing the rights of women. Islam gives the right set of rules, because they are NOT made by men, but made by God; hence it is a perfect religion.

Quite often Muslim women are asked why they are covered from head to toe, and are told that this is oppression - it is not. In Islam, marriage is an important part of life, the making of the society. Therefore, a woman should not go around showing herself to everybody, only for her husband. Even the man is not allowed to show certain parts of his body to none but his wife. In addition, God has commanded Muslim women to cover themselves for their modesty:

"O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) over their bodies (when outdoors). That is most convenient that they could be known as such (i.e. decent and chaste) and not molested." (Qur'an 33:59)

If we look around at any other society, we find that in the majority of cases women are attacked and molested because of how they are dressed. Another point I'd like to comment on is that the rules and regulation laid down in Islam by God do not apply just to women but to men also. There is no intermingling and free-running between men and women for the benefit of both. Whatever God commands is right, wholesome, pure and beneficial to mankind; there is no doubt about that. A verse in the Qur'an explains this concept clearly:

"Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and protect their private parts (i.e. from indecency, illegal sexual acts, etc.); that will make for greater purity for them. And God is well aware of what they do. And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and protect their private parts (from indecency, illegal sexual intercourse, etc.); and that they should not display their beauty and ornaments . . . " (Qur'an, Surah Al-Nur 24:31)

When I put on my hijab (veil), I was really happy to do it. In fact, I really want to do it. When I put on the hijab, I felt a great sense of satisfaction and happiness. Satisfied that I had obeyed God's command. And happy with the good and blessings that come with it. I have felt secure and protected. In fact people respect me more for it. I could really see the difference in behaviour towards me.

Finally, I'd like to say that I had accepted Islam not blindly, or under any compulsion. In the Qur'an itself there is a verse which says "Let there be no compulsion in religion". I accepted Islam with conviction. I have seen, been there, done that, and seen both sides of the story. I know and have experienced what the other side is like, and I know that I have done the right thing. Islam does not oppress women, but rather Islam liberates them and gives them the respect they deserve. Islam is the religion God has chosen for the whole of mankind. Those who accept it are truly liberated from the chains and shackles of mankind whose ruling and legislating necessitates nothing but the oppression of one group by another and the exploitation and oppression of one sex by the other. This is not the case of Islam which truly liberated women and gave them an individuality not given by any other authority.

Sister Noor has been a Muslim for over a year and a half and is currently in her second year of undergraduate study in the Department of Biology at University of Essex, U. K.

Bubble Buster
"You mess with the BEST
You LOSE like the REST!"

17

Hindus, here is something to think about!

Hindu Pundit Suggests Hindus to Embrace Islam

ISLAMABAD: The Kalki Qtar being awaited by the Hindus for centuries is actually Hazrat Mohammad ( Peace be upon him) who had brought the message of Allah 1,400 years back and as such , the Hindus should not waste their time and embrace Islam, according to a report appearing in weekly Hurmat

The magazine quoted a book titled 'Kalki Otar' by a Hindu Pundit , ved Prakash recently published in India as having disclosed that according to the holy books of the Hindu religion , Kalki Otar was to be born in Arab islands his father's name would be 'vishno Bhagat' and mother's name was to be ' Somanb' and both the words are Sansikarised version of Abdullah and Amenah. Similarly , the Hindu books said that he was to get knowledge through an angel in a cave and it has already happened in the xasw of Hazrat Mohammad ( peace be upon him ). There fore , Hindus should embrace Islam without fail .

The Hurmat added that ved Prakash held a high position in Allahabad University and he had presented his research before eight grand pundits of India and they had endorsed his research.--NNI
18 May 1999

Bubble Buster
"You mess with the BEST
You LOSE like the REST!"

18

Inferiority of The Dalit

Excerpts From: Hinduism and Islam A Comparative Study

The so-called Dalits (Untouchables) are the most pitiable victims of the obnoxious and pernicious caste system. Manu has little to say about them. He affirms that the members of three castes, the Brahman, the Kshatriya, and the Vashya, are twice-born; the fourth, the Sudra, once-born; there is no fifth.' All others are outcastes. The common name Dasyas (slaves) is applied to them all. 1 ]

The treatment accorded to the Dalit is simply inhuman. According to Manu Smriti, 'Outcasted persons have no share in inheritance.' 2 ] The orthodox Brahmans still believe, if the shadow of a Dalit falls on them, they are polluted and will have to purify them by sprinkling over themse1ves water from the holy river, the Ganges 3 ]. 'You may breed cows and dogs in your house,' wrote Mr. M.C. Raja. 'You may drink the urine of cows and swallow cowdung to expiate your sins, but you shall not approach an Adi Dravida 4 ]. These people are still denied the use of public wells and tanks and at the same time stigmatized as unclean. They are still kept out of schools and colleges maintained by public funds and at the same time despised as ignorant and illiterate. They are still Shut out from temples, and yet branded as ungodly and unfit to associate with. For access to public roads and even for spaces to bury the dead, they have to depend much on the capricious benevolence of their caste-Hindu neighbours. 5]

References

[1] Wilkins: Modern Hinduism, London: 1975, p. 263. [2] John C. Oman, The Brahmans, Theists, and Muslims of India, Delhi, 1973, p. 47. [3] F.M. Sandeela, Islam, Christianity and Hinduism, Delhi, 1990, pp. 69-70. [4] i.e., original Indians: Dalits, Sudras, tribal people. [5] Swami Dharma Theertha, History of Hindu Imperialism, (Madras: 1992), pp. 184-85, quoted from P. Chidambaram Pillai's Right of Temple Entry, p. 150.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

19

Untouchability in Practice

Excerpts From: Hinduism and Islam A Comparative Study

Untouchability has been banned in the constitution of India, which was drafted by a committee headed by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, himself an untouchable. It was his great ingenuity that he could tactfully make such a provision in the constitution of a country dominated by the Brahmans. However, there are plenty of evidences that the constitutional provision is honoured more by violation than by observance by millions of so-called high caste Hindus. Here are some:

"An attempt by a group of Harijans (untouchables) to enter an historic Hindu temple at the holy town of Nathdwara in Rajasthan state failed on Monday evening when high caste priests and others beat them back with sticks, injuring at least six. The attempt was organized by social reformers to coincide with the 120th anniversary of the birth of Mahatma Gandhi, the spiritual founder of independent India, who named the Untouchables (Dalits) 'Harijans.' Reports from Nathdwara say, a large contingent of police, deployed by the state government to maintain peace, took no action to prevent the attack despite the high court ruling." (Financial Times, 6 October 1988) "In a village 100 miles from Delhi, villagers hanged and then threw on to a fire a girl and two boys; the boys had first been tortured, while their fathers made to watch, and one of them and the girl had still been alive when put in fire. They had managed to crawl out, but were thrown back. The girl, from the powerful Jat caste, had tried to elope with one of the boys, assisted by his friend; both were untouchables, a group so low they are not even on the bottom rung of the caste ladder. Not long before, in three villages in the state of Bihar, the huts of 400-odd families of untouchables were burnt down by gangs working for the local landowning caste, because they were demanding the legal minimum wage, 16 rupees (78 cents) a day." (The Economist, June 8th 1991).

"At school Harijans are often made to sit on the floor; in some villages they have to take off their shoes while walking past upper-caste houses, and are usually banned from drawing water from the village well for fear they will pollute it...A Brahmin on a packed bus cannot hop off and bathe six times each time he fears the shadow of an untouchable has fallen on him." (The Economist June 8th 1991).

"Twenty Harijans (untouchables) have been hacked to death in a village in southern India by high caste Hindus and their bodies thrown into a nearby canal, news papers reports said. The Statesman said the incident occurred on Tuesday at Tsundur village near Guntur town in Andhra Pradesh state. Other reports said a group of Harijans were attacked by deadly weapons while trying to flee across marshes. A police picked in the village remained passive to the gruesome murders, The Hindu newspaper said. The incident had its origins in an incident that occurred about a month back in a local cinema hall. A Harijan boy watching a movie stretched himself and his leg accidentally touched a high-caste boy sitting in the next seat. Soon there was an altercation between them. The Hindus took this as an affront on their authority. They summoned the teacher-father of the Harijan boy and held him hostage until they caught hold of the boy and beat him. After this, other minor incidents between the two groups snowballed and finally led to arson and mayhem. The southern Indian incident comes three weeks after two lower caste youths and a 15-year old upper caste girl were publicly hanged by their own fathers goaded by a vigilante mob in a north Indian village. They were punished for defying the Hindu social code barring inter-caste marriage." (Arab News, August l0, 1991).

"In 1989, the national government (of India) recorded 14,269 cases of atrocities committed against outcastes, including 479 murders and 759 rapes." (Arab News, March 31 1991).

"Jagjivan Ram (former Union Minister of India) with all power and wealth at his command was made to know that his social status was not even equal to the poorest and uneducated Brahmin of India. When he visited Varanasi on invitation and garlanded the statue of Sampurnanand (a Kayasth), the statue was washed with Gangajal (sacred water of the Ganges) and mantras were recited to make it 'pure' as the touch of a SC (untouchable) had desecrated the stone Statue." (Dalit Voice, Vol. 12, No. 21, p.17).

"In Kerala, Namboodiri Brahmins till very recently were compelling 'low caste' women not to wear blouses lest they should appear as high caste. The result was that these women had to go bare-breasted which was condemned by all civilized nations." (Dalit Voice, Vol. 12, No. 21, p. 17). Dalits and Hinduism

A recent example of caste-based atrocities was published by the Indian Express (June 24, 1995). A Scheduled Tribe woman, Prakash Kaur, was most painfully murdered in a village in Maharashtra province in May, 1995. Brutes from the Aryan Hindus (l) dragged her to the village temple; (2) shaved her head; (3) beat her with sticks, (4) inserted a stick into her private parts; (5) blackened her face; (6) put her on a donkey and paraded her in the market; and (7) continued to beat her till she died. When the dying woman asked for water, the killers poured hot water and kerosene in her mouth. Her only offence (?) was that her 12-year old son had entered the local Hindu temple. The place where the incident took place is very close to the local police station. The more painful aspect of the incident is that when the Home Minister of the state was contacted by the All India Democratic Women's Association, he refused to take any action in the matter saying that it was not a murder but a "reflection of mob anger."

Another recent example of caste-based atrocities was published by the Times of India in its issue of 18 January 1997. A 41-year old low-caste women was stripped and paraded naked through a village near Muradabad town (U.P.). Her only offence (?) was that her son had, allegedly, teased a girl who was a caste Hindu. The woman cried for help but none dared to come to her aid.

The racial atrocities meted out by the arrogant caste or Aryan Hindus to the underprivileged people of India have no parallel in modern world. The above instances are only few of such incidents presented to indicate how things are going on in a country claimed to be the largest democracy in the world.

In the memory of the women who was most brutally murdered by religious fanatics as described in the June 24, 1995, issue of the Indian Express. No one cared to save her from such inhumanity.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!

20

Status of The Sudras

Excerpts From: Hinduism and Islam A Comparative Study

The Sudra has a precarious position in Hindu community. According to Manu Smrithi, a Brahman is forbidden to give advice or even food to a Sudra, for the ghi (clarified butter) having been offered to the gods, must not be eaten by him. Further, the Brahman must not give 'spiritual counsel to him,' nor inform him of the legal expiation of his sin. He who declares the law to a servile man, and he who instructs him in the mode of expiating sin, sinks with that very man into hell.

A Brahman should never be the guru of a Sudra. 'While the first part of a Brahman's name should indicate holiness that of a Kshatriya's power and that of a Vashya's wealth, that of a Sudra 's should indicate contempt. The Veda is never to be read in the presence of a Sudra, and for him no sacrifice is to be performed. He has no business with solemn rites 1 ].

A Sudra has no right even to listen to the Veda. Recitation of or listening to this sacred book is exclusively a privilege of the Aryan Hindus. There is provision of severe punishment for a Sudra, in case he dares to enjoy this privilege. If he "overheard a recitation of the Vedas, molten lac or tin was to be poured into his mouth; if he repeated recitation of the Vedas, his tongue should be cut; and if he remembered Vedic hymns, his body was to be torn into pieces." 2 ]

A Sudra is debarred from marrying a woman of the higher castes; if he does, their offspring will sink into a class even lower than his own. He must not participate in carrying the corpse of a Brahman. He is allowed to carry his dead only through the southern gate of the city where he may live. The murder of a Sudra by a Brahman is equal only to killing a cat or a frog or a cow 3 ].

In fact, the Sudras who have only deprivations and sufferings in their lots, are not Hindus. As Wilkins suggests, "the Sudras were not originally part of the Hindu system, but were engrafted into it..." 4 ] Still worse than the Sudras are the Dalits (also called Untouchables) who fall outside the caste system and are therefore the worst in the social hierarchy.

References

[1] Wilkins, Modern Hinduism, London, 1975, pp. 247-48.
[2] Swami Dharma Theertha, History of Hindu Imperialism, Madras, 1992, p. 42.
[3] Wilkins, 1975, p.248.
[4] Ibid., p. 255.

Ghazi
Facts Are The Authority!