RSS outfit wants Manusmriti reworked

[jetray]

So why do you need some "8000 years" old laws for today? What about Uniform civil code? May be you should read more history. Manu based laws were the laws predominantly followed by most Hindus in British India and even Brits used it for Hindu religious matters before Hindu code bill came in to existence. Read out the following

"In pre-colonial India, the Manusmriti was the most authoritarian and important rule book for Hindu laws."

Manu-smriti | Hindu law | Britannica.com
http://www.indialawjournal.org/archives/volume8/issue-1/article10.html


Another attempt of creating pseudo history

So tell me if it was not actually anti-Dalit or anti-women then why Dalits and women had to face discrimination then. Why was their a need for Hindu code bill or reservations?

You are showing a lot of unwanted and biased concern. Quoting british and their ilk will do no favor. Why not be fair and post some charlie hebdo cartoons created by the french as well for great evidence.

Quoting manusmirti which even 90% hindus wouldnt heard of is not only ridiculous but also displays a whole lot of devious intentions.

Seriously ppl like you deserve a better country. Instead of whining about how hindus practice manusmriti in every day activities put your effort to moving to your jannat that might give you a lot of solace.

 

[ranjeet]

RSS outfit wants Manusmriti reworked
According to Chand, fresh research should be commissioned on Manusmriti.

Union Minister of Culture Mahesh Sharma (File Photo)
THE RSS’s cultural affiliate Sanskar Bharti is planning to tie up with the Union Ministry of Culture to promote activities that will “correct the lies that people have been fed” about ancient Hindu scriptures being “anti-Dalit and anti-woman”, starting with the Manusmriti, a senior office-bearer of the organisation told The Sunday Express.

According to Amir Chand, joint organisational secretary, Sanskar Bharti, the Sangh outfit believes that people should be educated about “the acceptance that our scriptures teach” through performing arts and awareness activities, such as seminars.

“We are debating the removal of portions from the Manusmriti, which are anti-Dalit and anti-woman and often quoted in arguments against Hindu scriptures,” he said.

“There are some references in Manusmriti where some objectionable things have been mentioned. It should be deleted. We do not support them. We have to see Manusmriti in today’s context. We will suggest to the government that they look into this,” said Chand.

When contacted by The Sunday Express, Union Minister of Culture, Mahesh Sharma said, “We have not received any such proposal. We will take cognizance once we get it.”

Manusmriti is a compilation of rules and regulations prepared by Manu meant for the conduct of a varnashrama, or a social system based on caste. Scholars date the codification by Manu to 200 CE, though claims are made for a much earlier date.

According to Chand, fresh research should be commissioned on Manusmriti.

“We believe that Manu was born 8,000 years ago… There are several versions of Manusmriti, which have been written 5,500 years after his birth and thus the credentials of the authors and their writings need to be questioned. It is a matter of research, someone needs to look in to this,” he said.

Chand said that the scriptures never “promoted anti-Dalit or anti-woman sentiments” and described such interpretations as “propaganda” and the result of “ignorance”.

“Many did not know that Rigveda has 47 richayen (hymns) written by a woman. How can such vedas be anti-woman? It is ignorance about our own scriptures that lead many to criticise them. I can understand that Manusmriti has something wrong, but that can be removed after thorough research into who wrote it,” said Chand.


http://indianexpress.com/article/in...orked-mahesh-sharma-culture-ministry-4654823/

And what exactly is the issue here?

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Manusmriti is a useless irrelevant book

Nobody cares for it

 

[The_Showstopper]

You are showing a lot of unwanted and biased concern. Quoting british and their ilk will do no favor. Why not be fair and post some charlie hebdo cartoons created by the french as well for great evidence.

Quoting manusmirti which even 90% hindus wouldnt heard of is not only ridiculous but also displays a whole lot of devious intentions.

Seriously ppl like you deserve a better country. Instead of whining about how hindus practice manusmriti in every day activities put your effort to moving to your jannat that might give you a lot of solace.

Don't worry mate, my concern is legit. So much burn over an article written by your very own ilk.

May be you should ask your grand parents about manusmriti, they will surely know about it/

Its actually the other way round, you don't deserve India, so why not migrate to some lala land where you can create your Hindu rashtra and let India live in peace.

And what exactly is the issue here?

Not an issue for me but it will be a concern for Dalits and Hindu women

 

[ranjeet]

Not an issue for me but it will be a concern for Dalits and Hindu women

How exactly?

 

[cerberus]

Manu Smiriti Is ancient LAW of the Manu Which was king

Manu Means raja or king Smriti means rules or old transcript

Every empire and civilization has Such Laws romans,greeks, egyptians Babylonians

Don't how relevant are they in 2017 or Indian republic Which runs by constitution

 

[The_Showstopper]

I am for maintaining status quo in reservations. And I understood long back when trying to civil with you and you never have ever responded me back with same civility. What u have done is bash BJP, RSS for all reasons.

When was I not civil to you? Show me a post of mine where I wasn't civil to you. Amongst the many posters here, I believed you to be more reasonable. But in this thread, you were busy taking potshots at me and muslims in general.

BJP doesnt have Muslims as its vote bank and if womens lose this opportunity, they will never have the evil practise of triple talaq undone. Simple as that...

Who stopped BJP from having muslims as votebank? If you think that by making noise over 3T BJP is going to win muslim women's votes then BJP is playing it wrong.

Yes Hindus havent changed.. But we didnt create an furore by going to SC and looked like an idiot in front of the world justifying child marriages or polygamy... but there are laws which can prosecute anyone anytime if one indulges in it...

Are you telling me that there was no opposition when Hindu laws were reformed. It was Sangh and many Hindutva leaders who fought tooth and nail against the reformation. Here are a few excerpts for you

"These bills aroused strong opposition from the Hindu nationalists. In Parliament N.C. Chatterjee, the Hindu Mahasabha leader, and S.P. Mokerjee protested vehemently against what they took to be a threat to file stability and integrity of traditional forms of marriage and the family in Hindu society.

Source: Nehru And The Hindu Code Bill - Outlook India

So you see, furore was created even then.

And yes... I oppose reservations based on religion... Our champion Ambedkar opposed it... So why do u want it now? U should be the first person to oppose it.... U use Ambedkar only when u wish so

So is the reservation given to Hindu backwards not based on religion? Why should a Hindu backward get reservation but not a muslim/christian backward?

How exactly?

This shall explain you

'By burning Manusmriti, we are burning discrimination': ABVP leader
These 33 Shocking Verses From Manusmriti About Women

 

[Chhatrapati]

@The_Showstopper I assume you are a muslim! Let's not make any comments on others religion. Or criticize them. It will never end well.

Let them handle their own affairs.

 

[ranjeet]

This shall explain you

'By burning Manusmriti, we are burning discrimination': ABVP leader
These 33 Shocking Verses From Manusmriti About Women

But isn't the article talks about removing such portions. What is the problem then? Or are you opposing removal of such portions?

 

[The_Showstopper]

@The_Showstopper I assume you are a muslim! Let's not make any comments on others religion. Or criticize them. It will never end well.

Let them handle their own affairs.

Why not mate, these people and the party they croon for have being commenting/maligning muslims. Shouldn't they be paid in kind.

Just look at the triple talaaqs threads opened by these "very concerned" individuals.

They should rather put their house in order before pointing fingers at others.

 

[cerberus]

Are you telling me that there was no opposition when Hindu laws were reformed. It was Sangh and many Hindutva leaders who fought tooth and nail against the reformation. Here are a few excerpts for you

"These bills aroused strong opposition from the Hindu nationalists. In Parliament N.C. Chatterjee, the Hindu Mahasabha leader, and S.P. Mokerjee protested vehemently against what they took to be a threat to file stability and integrity of traditional forms of marriage and the family in Hindu society.

Source: Nehru And The Hindu Code Bill - Outlook India

So you see, furore was created even then.

There was Congress leaders as well that includes That time home minister of congress eventually 70 % of the congress was against code bill

Congress before division of 1967 by indra were dominantly filled with right wing leaders such as morar ji desai others

watch this documentary by ABP news

 

[The_Showstopper]

But isn't the article talks about removing such portions. What is the problem then? Or are you opposing removal of such portions?

So why do you even need it in the first place? Why going back and "reworking" on it? Aren't we supposed to go ahead instead of steering backwards?

 

[cerberus]

When was I not civil to you? Show me a post of mine where I wasn't civil to you. Amongst the many posters here, I believed you to be more reasonable. But in this thread, you were busy taking potshots at me and muslims in general.


Who stopped BJP from having muslims as votebank? If you think that by making noise over 3T BJP is going to win muslim women's votes then BJP is playing it wrong.


Are you telling me that there was no opposition when Hindu laws were reformed. It was Sangh and many Hindutva leaders who fought tooth and nail against the reformation. Here are a few excerpts for you

"These bills aroused strong opposition from the Hindu nationalists. In Parliament N.C. Chatterjee, the Hindu Mahasabha leader, and S.P. Mokerjee protested vehemently against what they took to be a threat to file stability and integrity of traditional forms of marriage and the family in Hindu society.

Source: Nehru And The Hindu Code Bill - Outlook India

So you see, furore was created even then.


So is the reservation given to Hindu backwards not based on religion? Why should a Hindu backward get reservation but not a muslim/christian backward?


This shall explain you

'By burning Manusmriti, we are burning discrimination': ABVP leader
These 33 Shocking Verses From Manusmriti About Women

burn it like its represent any religious value to Hindus today

Manu smiriti has no religious relevance in Hinduism as religion

Same cannot said by bible or hadith if we burn on on similar grounds of gender discrimination

 

[The_Showstopper]

There we Congress leaders as well that includes That time home minister of congress eventually 70 % of the congress was against code bill

Congress before division of 1967 by indra were dominantly filled with right wing leaders such as morar ji desai

watch this documentary by ABP news

I never claimed that Congress is a bunch of honest leaders with liberal outlook. I clearly stated that it was people like Nehru, Ambedkar etc who worked for it.

burn it like its represent any religious value to Hindus today

Manu smiriti has no religious relevance in Hinduism as region

Same cannot said by bible or hadith if we burn on on similar grounds of gender discrimination

Not sure about now but it did have religious relevance then.

 

[ranjeet]

So why do you even need it in the first place? Why going back and "reworking" on it? Aren't we supposed to go ahead instead of steering backwards?

Did I miss something? Article talks about revision not a move to implement the revised law.