Moving reply here because of the request by the Vietnamese member to not go off-topic there.
You very well know these things are out of practice today
1. Sati is out of practice because of prohibition by non-Hindus and yes work done by progressive Hindus.
2. About giving marriage rights to women that exist in the modern world they come formalized in Islam or created in Islam. I will quote from
this thread of mine from 2015 whose OP is an article by an Indian Christian woman who married an Indian Muslim under Islamic marriage law because that better secured her socio-economic future in case of divorce. Do note the underlined :
When we examine marriage laws in their historic context, it is interesting to note that the universally accepted notion that marriages are contractual rather than sacramental originates in Muslim law, which was accepted by the French law only in the 1800s and incorporated into the English law in the 1850s and became part of codified Hindu law as late as 1955. Today it appears to be the most practical way of dealing with the institution of marriage. Treating marriage as a sacrament which binds the parties for life has resulted in some of the most discriminatory practices against women such as sati and denial of right to divorce and remarriage, even in the most adverse conditions.
The cornerstone of a Muslim marriage is consent, ejab-o-qubul (proposal and acceptance) and requires the bride to accept the marriage proposal on her own free will. This freedom to consent (or refuse), which was given to Muslim women 1,400 years ago, is still not available under Hindu law since sacramental rituals such as saptapadi and kanya dan (seven steps round the nuptial fire and gifting of the bride to the groom) still form essential ceremonies of a Hindu marriage. Even after the codification of Hindu law, the notion of consent is not built into the marriage ceremonies.
The contract of marriage (nikahnama) allows for negotiated terms and conditions, it can also include the right to a delegated divorce (talaq-e-tafweez) where the woman is delegated the right to divorce her husband if any of the negotiated terms and conditions are violated.
Mehr is another unique concept of Muslim law meant to safeguard the financial future of the wife. It is an obligation, not a choice, and can be in the form of cash, valuables or securities. While there is no ceiling, a minimum amount to provide her security after marriage must be stipulated. This is a more beneficial concept than streedhan which is given by choice and usually by the natal family. In addition to Mehr, at the time of divorce, a Muslim woman has the right to fair and reasonable settlement, and this is statutorily recognised under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 as per the 2001 ruling of the Supreme Court in the Daniel Latifi case.
Though Muslim law stipulates many different ways to end a marriage, including a woman’s right to dissolve her marriage (khula), divorce by mutual consent (mubarra), delegated divorce (talaq-e-tafweez), judicial divorce (fasq)
3. Does Sanatan Dharma even give the right of inheritance to daughters ? In Islamic inheritance law a woman will inherit father's property ( or mother's property ) and if she is married then like written in point# 2 she will also have the mehr.
4. Caste system exists still today and promoted by prominent leaders like Sadhvi Pragya.
5. Farmer suicides and the 3000-year-old extreme Capitalism that is undeniably part of Sanatan Dharma. Just between 1995 and 2017 more than 300,000 Indian farmers committed suicide mainly because of artificial and avoidable socio-economic reasons. Does any Hindutvadi leader talk of this ?
& we are open to criticism, we dont kill if offended.
1. We all know about the assassination of four progressive Hindus in recent years. Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, MM Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh. The assassins were Hindutvadis. So they kill when offended. That indicates the inherent violence in them which manifests in other situations too.
2. My thread from last week :
'Arrest Swara Bhasker' trends on Twitter as she compares 'Taliban terror' with 'Hindutva terror' Celebrity Shivani Dixit Updated Aug 18, 2021 | 10:10 IST Bollywood actress Swara Bhasker recently made a comment on the ongoing Afghanistan crisis. Her tweet was met with a lot of backlash online...
defence.pk
But you are just scared to face the truth, why will the creator allow killing of animals, killing of fellow human beings?
1. Come on, there is an entire religious story called Mahabharata that is about waging a big war. And the inherent violence in today's Hindutvadis who champion that book among other things. Do they not feel ashamed in front of the Creator ?
2. In the late 1990s Maneka Gandhi who was an "Environment Minister" or some such in the then BJP government proclaimed that henceforth Indian city municipal corporations will not eliminate stray dogs. This has led to the situation now where there are 35+ million stray dogs which have not only attacked and killed humans but have killed cats to the point of almost extinction. And especially the middle class have adopted the non-gentle, cruel, chaotic, non-empathetic, gang-living ways of the dog. How much of the Indian middle class is concerned about socio-economic wrongs in India including those farmer suicides ? Do these people look at the almost-extinct status of cats here ( that killing of animals you mentioned ) ?
Make hell on earth in exchange of virgin & alcohol in heaven? do u think creator will say this?
I don't believe in that.
Why do you oppose Taliban & TTP when they want to practise Quran without any sugarcoating like you to make things look sane & civilised.
The Taliban forces Afghan women to marry their fighters and leaders. Right there they are going against Islamic principles. They should read texts like those I quoted above about women's marriage rights.
And the TTP and the Taliban wouldn't know of the socio-economic similarity between Islam and Communism. I quote from
my 2016 thread whose OP is an article by Pakistani journalist Nadeem Paracha and is about Socialist and Communist activism and thought among Muslims since the early 1900s :
During the same period (1920s-30s), another (though lesser known) Islamic scholar in undivided India got smitten by the 1917 Russian revolution and Marxism.
Hafiz Rahman Sihwarwl saw Islam and Marxism sharing five elements in common: (1) prohibition of the accumulation of wealth in the hands of the privileged classes (2) organisation of the economic structure of the state to ensure social welfare (3) equality of opportunity for all human beings (4) priority of collective social interest over individual privilege and (5) prevention of the permanentising of class structure through social revolution.
The motivations for many of these themes he drew from the Qur’an, which he understood as seeking to create an economic order in which the rich pay excessive, though voluntary taxes (Zakat) to minimise differences in living standards.
In the areas that Sihwarwl saw Islam and communism diverge were Islam’s sanction of private ownership within certain limits, and in its refusal to recognise an absolutely classless basis of society.
He suggested that Islam, with its prohibition of the accumulation of wealth, is able to control the class structure through equality of opportunity.
Basically, both Sindhi and Sihwarwl had stumbled upon an Islamic concept of the social democratic welfare state.
Please read that entire OP there and the subsequent thread convo. I identify with the older type of those Muslims activists and thinkers instead of those new type irritating, unintelligent, misinformed and misguided Tablighi Jamaat types.
Should have copied it into my email drafts folder.
