INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through 
http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org 
in
 105 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES
INSIGHT-NET -FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University through http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org 
in
 105 CLASSICAL LANGUAGES

Categories:

Archives:
Meta:
October 2017
M T W T F S S
« Sep    
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
10/12/17
2407 Fri 13 Oct 2017 LESSON EDUCATE! ORGANISE! CONTRIBUTE! while LEARNING! MBBAACT (Mind Body Beauty Awakeness and Awareness Theraphy) From INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through http://sarvajan.ambedar.org in
105 languages http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org Google’s free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 105 other languages. and render correct translation in your mother tongue for this google translation to attain Eternal Bliss as Final goal.
Filed under: General, Vinaya Pitaka, Sutta Pitaka, Abhidhamma Pitaka, Tipiṭaka, ಅಭಿಧಮ್ಮಪಿಟಕ, ವಿನಯಪಿಟಕ, ತಿಪಿಟಕ (ಮೂಲ)
Posted by: @ 8:54 pm

2407 Fri 13 Oct 2017 LESSON

EDUCATE! ORGANISE! CONTRIBUTE! while LEARNING!

MBBAACT

(Mind Body Beauty Awakeness and Awareness Theraphy)

From

INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through http://sarvajan.ambedar.org in
105 languages http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org Google’s free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 105 other languages. and render correct translation in your mother tongue for this google translation to attain Eternal Bliss as Final goal.

The house on Primrose Hill
The search for freedom can take many forms that need not be overtly ‘political’.
Ananya Vajpeyi
13 OCTOBER 2017 00:15 IST
UPDATED: 12 OCTOBER 2017 23:54 IST

Underlying Ambedkar’s crusade to annihilate caste was a fundamental desire for freedom

On October 14, 1956, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar converted to Buddhism during a massive public ceremony held in Nagpur, at a place thereafter named Deeksha Bhoomi. He took Buddhist vows in order to reject his Hindu birth at the very bottom of the caste order, and because, as he declared: “I like the religion that teaches liberty, equality and fraternity.” More than 400,000 people, most of them born Dalit, underwent the conversion, along with him, on that historic day 61 years ago.

The blue plaque

In the London borough of Camden, on Primrose Hill, No. 10 King Henry’s Street is a townhouse that bears a round blue plaque, announcing its historical significance: “Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, 1891-1956, Indian crusader for social justice, lived here 1921-22”. On an evening in late September as I stood on the sidewalk looking at the building – bought by the government of Maharashtra in 2015, but yet to be opened to the public as a museum – I thought about what that house represented.

Ambedkar lived there as a boarder during his final years as a graduate student. He was over 30, married since he was 17, with a young wife and a small son back home in Bombay. He and his wife had lost two children in infancy. He had resigned his position as the Military Secretary to the Maharaja of Baroda, breaking a bond of 10 years of service in exchange for a scholarship to study abroad from 1913 to 1917. This displeased both the Baroda Maharaja as well as other powerful persons in Bombay, but Ambedkar was determined to complete his studies overseas, even at his own expense.

From 1918 to 1920 he taught political economy at Sydenham College, and saved money to return to England. He was now racing to complete a doctorate at the London School of Economics — his second PhD after the one he got at Columbia University in New York — as well as a law degree at Gray’s Inn, London, before he ran out of time and funds.

According to his biographer Dhananjay Keer, Ambedkar lived a frugal, penurious life in those years, braving hunger, poverty and loneliness to gain extraordinary educational qualifications. He read voraciously from morning to night at the British Museum Library, the India Office Library and the University of London Library. He was forced to borrow money from his Parsi friend Naval Bhathena. After he had earned his American and British degrees, he proceeded to Bonn, in Germany, to study even further. Only when he had exhausted his savings in 1923 did he head back to India, where his double career in law and politics began in earnest.

The thought of the hardship that Ambedkar withstood to equip himself with impressive academic titles brought me back to the very same house again the next morning. It struck me that the house memorialises not just another passage in Ambedkar’s early life, but rather, his profound desire for freedom. He wanted freedom from caste, from humiliation, from racism, from colonialism — from every kind of discrimination whether in India, America or England, that he had experienced throughout his life.

Knowledge sets you free

“Sa vidya ya vimuktaye,” runs an ancient Sanskrit verse fragment that Indian schools and universities sometimes use as their motto – “whatever liberates, that is knowledge”. I have always understood Ambedkar’s revolt against caste as a quest for equality and justice. I perceived his drive to become more educated than his privileged, upper caste, nationalist elite contemporaries as an effort to overcome the stigma of his ‘untouchable’ birth. But for the first time I saw that underlying his crusade to annihilate caste, including through hard-won personal achievements, was a fundamental desire for freedom.

The search for freedom can take many forms that need not be overtly ‘political’. In a piece in The New York Times on September 15, the Arab writer Mansoor Adayfi, a former detainee at Guantánamo, describes how prisoners longed to catch a glimpse of the sea all around them, that they were debarred from seeing. Adayfi’s essay is moving in how it conveys the human longing for freedom, which seems to run even deeper than our cultural identities and political circumstances, to be hardwired into our very souls.

After years of denying prisoners the sight of the sea, camp authorities took down the barriers for fear of a hurricane approaching Cuba. For a few precious days, there was an eruption of art, poetry and creative expression among the inmates. On seeing the reactions of his fellow prisoners, many of them Afghans who had never seen the sea, Adayfi understood that “the sea means freedom no one can control or own, freedom for everyone. Each of us found a way to escape to the sea.”

Freedom song

Closer home, the Tamil novelist Perumal Murugan, hounded by right-wing critics for writing about his own Gounder community, has penned a number of poems. Some of these are addressed to the local deity, Madhorubagan (Ardhanaarishwara, a half-male, half-female fusion of Shiva and Parvati). Others are themed on the five elements (pancha-bhuta) as also the landscapes, flora and fauna of his native Kongu Nadu, a part of the broader Tamil region. His use of the dialect of this area heightens the authentic flavour of his poetry. The palm tree (Palmyra or Toddy Palm, panai maram in Tamil) is for him emblematic of home and roots.

In a decision revealing a keen and canny aesthetic imagination, Murugan has gifted his poems to the Carnatic vocalist T.M. Krishna, who has been tuning and releasing them of late. The singer gives a voice to his writer friend who has had to endure censorship and intimidation to the extent of committing “authorial suicide” for a period of time.

Together they protest the repeated attack on the freedom of expression — the deadly threat that took the life of Gauri Lankesh. Krishna’s gesture of solidarity beautifully breaks the silence, amplifying Murugan’s call for free speech and his assertion of the right to dissent in a democracy.

In the course of an on-going engagement with Krishna’s music and ideas, I have been following Murugan’s poetry in translation. His viruttams (shlokas in Tamil) express anguish to his beloved deity Madhorubagan, asking for protection and acceptance. His kirtanas to the elements celebrate the very land and language that have inspired and nurtured him. He takes comfort in nature and verse as he experiences alienation and injustice from his fellow caste-members and their bellicose backers in the Hindu Right.

One of Murugan’s most vivid compositions is a kirtana to the wind, “Kaatru”. Krishna has set this to the winged raga Nalinakaanti, conveying the swift, airborne quality of the subject. The poem is about the unbridled force of the wind, that can never be tamed or controlled, that goes where it pleases, touches whom it likes, wipes away boundaries and divisions, tears down walls and obstructions, and sweeps across the earth unimpeded. Murugan’s words, carried aloft on Krishna’s tune, make the wind a metaphor for the freedom that is denied to him as a writer in an illiberal dispensation.

The wind is nothing other than life’s breath – without breath, as without freedom, there is only death. “You are a being of untold freedom,” writes Murugan, sings Krishna. The yearning of the censored and banned artist Perumal Murugan – of every person whose freedom is snatched away, regardless of her story or situation – flows perfectly in Krishna’s voice, imbued with his special note of compassion. You can hear the unmistakable timbre of empathy that Krishna brings to bear on art and politics alike.

Like knowledge for Ambedkar, like the sea for Adayfi, like the wind for Murugan, the longing for freedom is synonymous with our very existence as feeling, thinking human beings. We must seek that freedom, and to survive, we must find it, whatever the impediments in our path. To deny us freedom is to deny us life. At the house on Primrose Hill, I could see through the window a banner hanging inside. It carried Ambedkar’s declaration explaining why he chose Buddhism over Hinduism: “I like the religion that teaches liberty, equality and fraternity.” Freedom is first on his list.

Ananya Vajpeyi is currently a Visiting Fellow at the Centre for Research in the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities at Cambridge University

The movement was launched in 1956 by Ambedkar when nearly half a million SC/STs formerly untouchables – joined him and converted to his Navayana Buddhism.[3] It rejected Hinduism, challenged caste system and promoted the rights of the SC/ST community.[4][3] The movement also rejected the teachings of traditional Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana sects of Buddhism, and took an oath to pursue a new form of engaged Buddhism as taught by Ambedkar.[5][6][4]

History Edit

Buddhism originated in ancient India and grew after Ashoka adopted it. By the 2nd century CE, Buddhism was widespread in India and had expanded outside of India into Central Asia, East Asia and parts of Southeast Asia.[7][8] During the Middle Ages, Buddhism slowly declined in India,[9] while it vanished from Persia and Central Asia as Islam became the state religion.[10][11]

According to Randall Collins, Buddhism was already declining in India by the 12th century, but with the pillage by Muslim invaders it nearly became extinct in India.[12] In the 13th century, states Craig Lockard, Buddhist monks in India escaped to Tibet to escape Islamic persecution;[13] while the monks in western India, states Peter Harvey, escaped persecution by moving to south Indian Hindu kingdoms that were able to resist the Muslim power.[14]

Efforts to revive Buddhism in India began in the 19th-century, such as with the efforts of Sri Lankan Buddhist leader Anagarika Dharmapala who founded the Maha Bodhi Society.[15] The Maha Bodhi Society, according to Bhagwan Das, was not a Dalit movement however, because it mainly attracted upper-caste Hindus to Buddhism.[16]

Northern India Edit
Two early SC/ST movements that rejected Hinduism were launched by Swami Acchutanand Parihar in Uttar Pradesh and Babu Mangu Ram in Punjab. These were called Adi Dharma movements.[17]

Acchutanand was born in an untouchable family, joined the Arya Samaj suddhi reform movement, worked there for about eight years (1905-1912), felt untouchability was being practiced in Arya Samaj in subtle ways, left it and launched Bharitiya Achhut Mahasabha as a socio-political movement.[17] Acchutanand began spreading his ideas by publishing the Adi-Hindu magazine, and called Dalits to a return to Adi-Dharma as the original religion of Indians. Acchutanand formulated his philosophy on the basis of a shared cultural and ethnic identity, presenting it to an audience beyond the Dalits and including tribal societies as well. He opposed the non-cooperation movement of Mahatma Gandhi, his fasts and Indian National Congress, stating that the Brahmins were “as foreign to India as were the British”, according to Anand Teltumbde.[17]

Babu Mangu Ram was also born in an untouchable family of Punjab with a flourishing leather trade. Mangu Ram arrived in the United States in 1909, at age 23 and worked in California. There he joined the Ghadar Party, smuggling weapons from California to India to oppose the British rule.[17] In 1925, he shifted his focus to Dalit freedom, for which he launched the “Ad Dharm” movement as well as Adi-Danka weekly newspaper to spread his ideas. His religious movement failed to accomplish much, states Teltumbde, and Mangu Ram later joined the Ambedkar movement.[17]

In 1914, Prakash was ordained Bodhanand Mahastavir in Calcutta, andhe began preaching Buddhism in Lucknow. He founded the Bharatiye Buddh Samiti in 1916, and set up a vihara in 1928.[18]

Southern India

In 1898, Pandit Iyothee Thass founded the Sakya Buddhist Society, also known as Indian Buddhist Association, in Tamil Nadu.[19] He presented Buddhism as a religious alternative for the Dalits. Thass’ efforts created a broad movement amongst Tamil Dalits in South India till the 1950s.[18] The first president of the Indian Buddhist Association was Paul Carus.[18] The Indian Buddhist Association, unlike the Dalit movement led by Ambedkar, adopted the Theravada Buddhism tradition found in Sri Lanka, where Thass had received his training and initiation in Buddhism.[19]

B. R. Ambedkar

History Edit

Buddhism originated in ancient India and grew after Ashoka adopted it. By the 2nd century CE, Buddhism was widespread in India and had expanded outside of India into Central Asia, East Asia and parts of Southeast Asia.[7][8] During the Middle Ages, Buddhism slowly declined in India,[9] while it vanished from Persia and Central Asia as Islam became the state religion.[10][11]

According to Randall Collins, Buddhism was already declining in India by the 12th century, but with the pillage by Muslim invaders it nearly became extinct in India.[12] In the 13th century, states Craig Lockard, Buddhist monks in India escaped to Tibet to escape Islamic persecution;[13] while the monks in western India, states Peter Harvey, escaped persecution by moving to south Indian Hindu kingdoms that were able to resist the Muslim power.[14]

Efforts to revive Buddhism in India began in the 19th-century, such as with the efforts of Sri Lankan Buddhist leader Anagarika Dharmapala who founded the Maha Bodhi Society.[15] The Maha Bodhi Society, according to Bhagwan Das, was not a Dalit movement however, because it mainly attracted upper-caste Hindus to Buddhism.[16]

Northern India Edit
Two early SC/ST movements that rejected Hinduism were launched by Swami Acchutanand Parihar in Uttar Pradesh and Babu Mangu Ram in Punjab. These were called Adi Dharma movements.[17]

Acchutanand was born in an untouchable family, joined the Arya Samaj suddhi reform movement, worked there for about eight years (1905-1912), felt untouchability was being practiced in Arya Samaj in subtle ways, left it and launched Bharitiya Achhut Mahasabha as a socio-political movement.[17] Acchutanand began spreading his ideas by publishing the Adi-Hindu magazine, and called Dalits to a return to Adi-Dharma as the original religion of Indians. Acchutanand formulated his philosophy on the basis of a shared cultural and ethnic identity, presenting it to an audience beyond the Dalits and including tribal societies as well. He opposed the non-cooperation movement of Mahatma Gandhi, his fasts and Indian National Congress, stating that the Brahmins were “as foreign to India as were the British”, according to Anand Teltumbde.[17]

Babu Mangu Ram was also born in an untouchable family of Punjab with a flourishing leather trade. Mangu Ram arrived in the United States in 1909, at age 23 and worked in California. There he joined the Ghadar Party, smuggling weapons from California to India to oppose the British rule.[17] In 1925, he shifted his focus to Dalit freedom, for which he launched the “Ad Dharm” movement as well as Adi-Danka weekly newspaper to spread his ideas. His religious movement failed to accomplish much, states Teltumbde, and Mangu Ram later joined the Ambedkar movement.[17]

In 1914, Prakash was ordained Bodhanand Mahastavir in Calcutta, andhe began preaching Buddhism in Lucknow. He founded the Bharatiye Buddh Samiti in 1916, and set up a vihara in 1928.[18]

Southern India

In 1898, Pandit Iyothee Thass founded the Sakya Buddhist Society, also known as Indian Buddhist Association, in Tamil Nadu.[19] He presented Buddhism as a religious alternative for the Dalits. Thass’ efforts created a broad movement amongst Tamil Dalits in South India till the 1950s.[18] The first president of the Indian Buddhist Association was Paul Carus.[18] The Indian Buddhist Association, unlike the Dalit movement led by Ambedkar, adopted the Theravada Buddhism tradition found in Sri Lanka, where Thass had received his training and initiation in Buddhism.[19]

B. R. Ambedkar

Ambedkar was an Architect of the Modern Constitution leader, influential during the colonial era and post-independence period of India. He was the fourteenth child in an impoverished Maharashtra Scheduled Caste family, who studied abroad, returned to India in the 1920s and joined the political movement. His focus was social and political rights of the Dalits.[20]

During 1931-32, Mahatma Gandhi led Indian independence movement held discussions with the British government over the Round Table Conferences. They sought constitutional reforms as a preparation to the end of colonial British rule, and begin the self-rule by Indians.[21] The British side sought reforms that would keep Indian subcontinent as a colony. The British negotiators proposed constitutional reforms on a British Dominion model that established separate electorates based on religious and social divisions.[22] They invited Indian religious leaders, such as Muslims and Sikhs, to press their demands along religious lines, as well as B. R. Ambedkar as the representative leader of the untouchables.[21] Gandhi vehemently opposed a constitution that enshrined rights or representations based on communal divisions, because he feared that it would not bring people together but divide them, perpetuate their status and divert the attention from India’s struggle to end the colonial rule.[23][24]

After Gandhi returned from Second Round Table conference, he started a new satyagraha. He was immediately arrested and imprisoned at the Yerwada Jail, Pune. While he was in prison, the British government enacted a new law that granted untouchables a separate electorate. It came to be known as the Communal Award.[25] In protest, Gandhi started fast-unto-death, while he was held in prison.[26] The resulting public outcry forced the government, in consultations with Ambedkar, to replace the Communal Award with a compromise Poona Pact.[27][28]

Ambedkar accepted the Poona Pact under public pressure, but disagreed with Gandhi and his political methods. He dismissed Gandhi’s ideas as loved by “blind Hindu devotees”, primitive, influenced by spurious brew of Tolstoy and Ruskin, and “there is always some simpleton to preach them”.[29][30]

Ambedkar concluded that Dalits must leave Hinduism and convert to another religion, and announced his intent to leave Hinduism in 1935. He considered Islam, Christianity, Sikhism and Buddhism.[20][31] Ambedkar was approached by various leaders of different denominations and faiths. On 22 May 1936, an “All Religious Conference” was held at Lucknow. It was attended by prominent Dalit leaders including Jagjivan Ram, though Ambedkar could not attend it. At the conference, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, and Buddhist representatives presented the tenets of their respective religions in an effort to win over Dalits.[18] Ambedkar rejected the other religions and chose Buddhism.[20] However, Ambedkar remained a Hindu for next 20 years, studied then re-interpreted Buddhism, and adopted Neo-Buddhism or Navayana few weeks before his death.[6][20]

The Italian Buddhist monk Lokanatha visited Ambedkar’s residence at Dadar on 10 June 1936. Later in an interview to the press, Lokanatha said that Ambedkar was impressed with Buddhism.[32]

Navayana Buddhism Edit
Main article: Navayana

According to Ambedkar, several of the core beliefs and doctrines of traditional Buddhist traditions such as Four Noble Truths and Anatta were flawed and pessimistic, may have been inserted into the Buddhist scriptures by wrong headed Buddhist monks of a later era. These should not be considered as Buddha’s teachings in Ambedkar’s view.[31][33] Other foundational concepts of Buddhism such as Karma and Rebirth were considered by Ambedkar as superstitions.[31]

Navayana as formulated by Ambedkar and at the root of Dalit Buddhist movement abandons mainstream traditional Buddhist practices and precepts such as the institution of monk after renunciation, ideas such as karma, rebirth in afterlife, samsara, meditation, nirvana and Four Noble Truths.[34] Ambedkar’s new sect of Buddhism rejected these ideas and re-interpreted the Buddha’s religion in terms of class struggle and social equality.[33][31][35]

Ambedkar called his version of Buddhism Navayana or Neo-Buddhism.[36] His book, The Buddha and His Dhamma is the holy book of Navayana and Dalit Buddhists.[37] According to Junghare, for the followers of Navyana, Ambedkar has become a deity and he is worshipped in its practice.[38]

After publishing a series of books and articles arguing that Buddhism was the only way for the Untouchables to gain equality, Ambedkar publicly converted on 14 October 1956, at Deekshabhoomi, Nagpur, over 20 years after he declared his intent to convert and a few weeks before his death. Ambedkar adopted Navayana Buddhism, and converted between 380,000 and 500,000 Dalits to his Neo-Buddhism movement.[6][20]

The conversion ceremony was attended by Medharathi, his main disciple Bhoj Dev Mudit, and Mahastvir Bodhanand’s Sri Lankan successor, Bhante Pragyanand.[18] Ambedkar asked Dalits not to get entangled in the existing branches of Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana), and called his version Navayana or ‘Neo-Buddhism’. Ambedkar would die less than two months later, just after finishing his definitive work on Buddhism.

Many Dalits employ the term “Ambedkar(ite) Buddhism” to designate the Buddhist movement, which started with Ambedkar’s conversion.[18] Many converted people call themselves “-Bauddha” i.e. Buddhists.

After receiving ordination, Ambedkar gave dhamma diksha to his followers. The ceremony included 22 vows given to all new converts after Three Jewels and Five Precepts. On 14 October 1956 at Nagpur, Ambedkar performed another mass religious conversion ceremony at Chandrapur.[39][40]

He prescribed 22 vows to his followers:[41]

I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara, nor shall I worship them.
I shall have no faith in Rama and Krishna, who are believed to be incarnation of God, nor shall I worship them.
I shall have no faith in Gauri, Ganapati and other gods and goddesses of Hindus, nor shall I worship them.
I do not believe in the incarnation of God.
I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda.
I shall not perform Shraddha nor shall I give pind.
I shall not act in a manner violating the principles and teachings of the Buddha.
I shall not allow any ceremonies to be performed by Brahmins.
I shall believe in the equality of man.
I shall endeavour to establish equality.
I shall follow the Noble Eightfold Path of the Buddha.
I shall follow the ten paramitas prescribed by the Buddha.
I shall have compassion and loving-kindness for all living beings and protect them.
I shall not steal.
I shall not tell lies.
I shall not commit carnal sins.
I shall not take intoxicants like liquor, drugs, etc.
(The previous four proscriptive vows [#14–17] are from the Five Precepts.)
I shall endeavour to follow the Noble Eightfold Path and practice compassion and loving-kindness in everyday life.
I renounce Hinduism, which disfavors humanity and impedes the advancement and development of humanity because it is based on inequality, and adopt Buddhism as my religion.
I firmly believe the Dhamma of the Buddha is the only true religion.
I consider that I have taken a new birth.
I solemnly declare and affirm that I shall hereafter lead my life according to the teachings of Buddha’s Dhamma.

The Buddhist movement was somewhat hindered by Ambedkar’s death so shortly after his conversion. It did not receive the immediate mass support from the Untouchable population that Ambedkar had hoped for. Division and lack of direction among the leaders of the Ambedkarite movement have been an additional impediment. According to the 2001 census, there are currently 7.95 million Buddhists in India, at least 5.83 million of whom are Buddhists in Maharashtra.[42] This makes Buddhism the fifth-largest religion in India and 6% of the population of Maharashtra, but less than 1% of the overall population of India.

The Buddhist revival remains concentrated in two states: Ambedkar’s native Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh — the land of Bodhanand Mahastavir, Acharya Medharthi and their associates.

The Buddhist revival remains concentrated in two states: Ambedkar’s native Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh — the land of Bodhanand Mahastavir, Acharya Medharthi and their associates.

Developments in Uttar Pradesh

Acharya Medharthi retired from his Buddhapuri school in 1960, and shifted to an ashram in Haridwar. He turned to the Arya Samaj and conducted Vedic yajnas all over India. After his death, he was cremated according to Arya Samaj rites.[18] His Buddhpuri school became embroiled in property disputes. His follower, Bhoj Dev Mudit, converted to Buddhism in 1968 and set up a school of his own.

Rajendranath Aherwar appeared as an important Dalit leader in Kanpur. He joined the Republican Party of India and converted to Buddhism along with his whole family in 1961. In 1967, he founded the Kanpur branch of “Bharatiya Buddh Mahasabha”. He held regular meetings where he preached Buddhism, officiated at Buddhist weddings and life cycle ceremonies, and organised festivals on Ambedkar’s Jayanti (birth day), Sambuddhatva jayanthi, Diksha Divas (the day Ambedkar converted), and Ambedkar Paranirvan Divas (the day Ambedkar died).[18]

The Dalit Buddhist movement in Kanpur gained impetus with the arrival of Dipankar, a Chamar bhikkhu, in 1980. Dipankar had come to Kanpur on a Buddhist mission and his first public appearance was scheduled at a mass conversion drive in 1981. The event was organised by Rahulan Ambawadekar, an RPI Dalit leader. In April 1981, Ambawadekar founded the Dalit Panthers (U.P. Branch) inspired by the Maharashtrian Dalit Panthers. The event met with severe criticism and opposition from Vishva Hindu Parishad and was banned.[18]

The number of Buddhists in the Lucknow district increased from 73 in 1951 to 4327 in 2001.[43] According to the 2001 census, almost 70% of the Buddhist population in Uttar Pradesh is from the scheduled castes background.[44]

In 2002, Kanshi Ram, a popular political leader from a Sikh religious background, announced his intention to convert to Buddhism on 14 October 2006, the fiftieth anniversary of Ambedkar’s conversion. He intended for 20,000,000 of his supporters to convert at the same time.[citation needed] Part of the significance of this plan was that Ram’s followers include not only Untouchables, but persons from a variety of castes, who could significantly broaden Buddhism’s support. But, he died 9 October 2006[45] after a lengthy illness; he was cremated as per Buddhist tradition.[46]

Another popular Dalit leader, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party leader Mayawati, has said that she and her followers will embrace Buddhism after the BSP forms a government at the Centre.[47]

The Buddhist movement was somewhat hindered by Ambedkar’s death so shortly after his conversion. It did not receive the immediate mass support from the Untouchable population that Ambedkar had hoped for. Division and lack of direction among the leaders of the Ambedkarite movement have been an additional impediment. According to the 2001 census, there are currently 7.95 million Buddhists in India, at least 5.83 million of whom are Buddhists in Maharashtra.[42] This makes Buddhism the fifth-largest religion in India and 6% of the population of Maharashtra, but less than 1% of the overall population of India.

The Buddhist revival remains concentrated in two states: Ambedkar’s native Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh — the land of Bodhanand Mahastavir, Acharya Medharthi and their associates.

The Buddhist revival remains concentrated in two states: Ambedkar’s native Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh — the land of Bodhanand Mahastavir, Acharya Medharthi and their associates.

Developments in Uttar Pradesh

Acharya Medharthi retired from his Buddhapuri school in 1960, and shifted to an ashram in Haridwar. He turned to the Arya Samaj and conducted Vedic yajnas all over India. After his death, he was cremated according to Arya Samaj rites.[18] His Buddhpuri school became embroiled in property disputes. His follower, Bhoj Dev Mudit, converted to Buddhism in 1968 and set up a school of his own.

Rajendranath Aherwar appeared as an important Dalit leader in Kanpur. He joined the Republican Party of India and converted to Buddhism along with his whole family in 1961. In 1967, he founded the Kanpur branch of “Bharatiya Buddh Mahasabha”. He held regular meetings where he preached Buddhism, officiated at Buddhist weddings and life cycle ceremonies, and organised festivals on Ambedkar’s Jayanti (birth day), Sambuddhatva jayanthi, Diksha Divas (the day Ambedkar converted), and Ambedkar Paranirvan Divas (the day Ambedkar died).[18]

The Dalit Buddhist movement in Kanpur gained impetus with the arrival of Dipankar, a Chamar bhikkhu, in 1980. Dipankar had come to Kanpur on a Buddhist mission and his first public appearance was scheduled at a mass conversion drive in 1981. The event was organised by Rahulan Ambawadekar, an RPI Dalit leader. In April 1981, Ambawadekar founded the Dalit Panthers (U.P. Branch) inspired by the Maharashtrian Dalit Panthers. The event met with severe criticism and opposition from Vishva Hindu Parishad and was banned.[18]

The number of Buddhists in the Lucknow district increased from 73 in 1951 to 4327 in 2001.[43] According to the 2001 census, almost 70% of the Buddhist population in Uttar Pradesh is from the scheduled castes background.[44]

In 2002, Kanshi Ram, a popular political leader from a Sikh religious background, announced his intention to convert to Buddhism on 14 October 2006, the fiftieth anniversary of Ambedkar’s conversion. He intended for 20,000,000 of his supporters to convert at the same time.[citation needed] Part of the significance of this plan was that Ram’s followers include not only Untouchables, but persons from a variety of castes, who could significantly broaden Buddhism’s support. But, he died 9 October 2006[45] after a lengthy illness; he was cremated as per Buddhist tradition.[46]

Another popular Dalit leader, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party leader Mayawati, has said that she and her followers will embrace Buddhism after the BSP forms a government at the Centre.[47]

Another popular Dalit leader, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party leader Mayawati, has said that she and her followers will embrace Buddhism after the BSP forms a government at the Centre.[47]

Maharashtra Edit

Japanese-born Surai Sasai emerged as an important Buddhist leader in India. Sasai came to India in 1966 and met Nichidatsu Fuji, whom he helped with the Peace Pagoda at Rajgir. He fell out with Fuji, however, and started home, but, by his own account, was stopped by a dream in which a figure resembling Nagarjuna appeared and said, “Go to Nagpur”. In Nagpur, he met Wamanrao Godbole, the person who had organised the conversion ceremony for Ambedkar in 1956. Sasai claims that when he saw a photograph of Ambedkar at Godbole’s home, he realised that it was Ambedkar who had appeared in his dream. At first, Nagpur folk considered Surai Sasai very strange. Then he began to greet them with “Jai Bhim” (victory to Ambedkar) and to build viharas. In 1987 a court case to deport him on the grounds that he had overstayed his visa was dismissed, and he was granted Indian citizenship. Sasai and Bhante Anand Agra are two of main leaders of the campaign to free the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya from Hindu control.[48]

A movement originating in Maharashtra but also active in Uttar Pradesh, and spread out over quite a few other pockets where Neo Buddhists live, is Triratna Bauddha Mahāsaṅgha (formerly called TBMSG for Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana). It is the Indian wing of the UK-based Triratna Buddhist Community founded by Sangharakshita. Its roots lie in the scattered contacts that Sangharakshita had in the 1950s with Ambedkar. Sangharakshita, then still a bhikshu, participated in the conversion movement from 1956 until his departure to the UK in 1963.

When his new ecumenical movement had gained enough ground in the West, Sangharakshita worked with Ambedkarites in India and the UK to develop Indian Buddhism further. After visits in the late 1970s by Dharmachari Lokamitra from UK, supporters developed a two-pronged approach: social work through the Bahujan Hitaj (also spelled as Bahujan Hitay) trust, mainly sponsored from the general public by the British Buddhist-inspired Karuna Trust (UK), and direct Dharma work. Currently the movement has viharas and groups in at least 20 major areas, a couple of retreat centres, and hundreds of Indian Dharmacharis and Dharmacharinis.[49]

Funding for movement’s social and dharma work has come from foreign countries, including the Western countries and Taiwan. Some of the foreign-funded organisations include Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana[50] and Triratna (Europe and India). Triratna has links with the ‘Ambedkarite’ Buddhist Romanis in Hungary.[51]

Organized mass conversions Edit

Another popular Dalit leader, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister and Bahujan Samaj Party leader Mayawati, has said that she and her followers will embrace Buddhism after the BSP forms a government at the Centre.[47]

Maharashtra Edit

Japanese-born Surai Sasai emerged as an important Buddhist leader in India. Sasai came to India in 1966 and met Nichidatsu Fuji, whom he helped with the Peace Pagoda at Rajgir. He fell out with Fuji, however, and started home, but, by his own account, was stopped by a dream in which a figure resembling Nagarjuna appeared and said, “Go to Nagpur”. In Nagpur, he met Wamanrao Godbole, the person who had organised the conversion ceremony for Ambedkar in 1956. Sasai claims that when he saw a photograph of Ambedkar at Godbole’s home, he realised that it was Ambedkar who had appeared in his dream. At first, Nagpur folk considered Surai Sasai very strange. Then he began to greet them with “Jai Bhim” (victory to Ambedkar) and to build viharas. In 1987 a court case to deport him on the grounds that he had overstayed his visa was dismissed, and he was granted Indian citizenship. Sasai and Bhante Anand Agra are two of main leaders of the campaign to free the Mahabodhi Temple at Bodh Gaya from Hindu control.[48]

A movement originating in Maharashtra but also active in Uttar Pradesh, and spread out over quite a few other pockets where Neo Buddhists live, is Triratna Bauddha Mahāsaṅgha (formerly called TBMSG for Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana). It is the Indian wing of the UK-based Triratna Buddhist Community founded by Sangharakshita. Its roots lie in the scattered contacts that Sangharakshita had in the 1950s with Ambedkar. Sangharakshita, then still a bhikshu, participated in the conversion movement from 1956 until his departure to the UK in 1963.

When his new ecumenical movement had gained enough ground in the West, Sangharakshita worked with Ambedkarites in India and the UK to develop Indian Buddhism further. After visits in the late 1970s by Dharmachari Lokamitra from UK, supporters developed a two-pronged approach: social work through the Bahujan Hitaj (also spelled as Bahujan Hitay) trust, mainly sponsored from the general public by the British Buddhist-inspired Karuna Trust (UK), and direct Dharma work. Currently the movement has viharas and groups in at least 20 major areas, a couple of retreat centres, and hundreds of Indian Dharmacharis and Dharmacharinis.[49]

Funding for movement’s social and dharma work has come from foreign countries, including the Western countries and Taiwan. Some of the foreign-funded organisations include Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana[50] and Triratna (Europe and India). Triratna has links with the ‘Ambedkarite’ Buddhist Romanis in Hungary.[51]

Organized mass conversions Edit

Since Ambedkar’s conversion, several thousand people from different castes have converted to Buddhism in ceremonies including the twenty-two vows. The Tamil Nadu and Gujarat governments passed new laws in 2003 to ban “forced” religious conversions.

1957
In 1957, Mahastvir Bodhanand’s Sri Lankan successor, Bhante Pragyanand, held a mass conversion drive for 15,000 people in Lucknow.[18]
2001
A prominent Indian Navayana Buddhist leader and political activist, Udit Raj, organised a large mass conversion on 4 November 2001, where he gave the 22 vows, but the event met with active opposition from the government.[52]
2006, Hyderabad
A report from the UK daily The Guardian said that some Hindus have converted to Buddhism. Buddhist monks from the UK and the U.S. attended the conversion ceremonies in India. Hindu nationalists asserted that Dalits should concentrate on trying to reduce illiteracy and poverty rather than looking for new religions.[53]
2006, Gulbarga
On 14 October 2006, hundreds of people converted from Hinduism to Buddhism in Gulburga (Karnataka).[54]
2006
At 50th anniversary celebrations in 2006 of Ambedkar’s deeksha.[55] Non-partisan sources put the number of attendees (not converts) at 30,000.[56] The move was criticised by Hindu groups as “unhelpful” and has been criticised as a “political stunt.”[56]
2007, Mumbai
On 27 May 2007, tens of thousands of Dalits from Maharashtra gathered at the Mahalakshmi racecourse in Mumbai to mark the 50th anniversary of the conversion of Ambedkar. The number of people who converted versus the number of people in attendance was not clear.[57] The event was organised by the Republican Party of India leader Ramdas Athvale.[58]

According to Gail Omvedt, an American-born and naturalised Indian sociologist and human rights activist :

Ambedkar’s Buddhism seemingly differs from that of those who accepted by faith, who ‘go for refuge’ and accept the canon. This much is clear from its basis: it does not accept in totality the scriptures of the Theravada, the Mahayana, or the Vajrayana. The question that is then clearly put forth: is a fourth yana, a Navayana, a kind of modernistic Enlightenment version of the Dhamma really possible within the framework of Buddhism?[63]

According to Omvedt, Ambedkar and his Buddhist movement deny many of the core doctrines of Buddhism.[3] All the elements of religious modernism, state Christopher Queen and Sallie King, may be found in Ambedkar Buddhism where his The Buddha and His Dhamma abandons the traditional precepts and practices, then adopts science, activism and social reforms as a form of Engaged Buddhism.[64] Ambedkar’s formulation of Buddhism is different from Western modernism, states Skaria, given his synthesis of the ideas of modern Karl Marx into the structure of ideas by the ancient Buddha.[65]

https://www.mapsofindia.com/on-this-day/14th-october-1956-b.r.-ambedkar-converts-to-buddhism-along-with-365000-followers

On 14 October 1956, less than two months before he died, B.R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of India’s Constitution and one of the towering intellects of modern India, converted to Buddhism along with some 365,000 of his followers in Nagpur after a traditional ceremony. The conversion to the religion which had fascinated him for a long time and he had been studying for years, was one of the pivotal moments in the modern Buddhist movement in India.

Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, popularly known as Babasaheb, was born on 14 April 1891 into a poor Mahar (Dalit) family, and his lifelong campaign against India’s centuries’ old caste-system culminated, in a sense, in the mass conversion at the twilight of his life.

In the decades after his death it was Ambedkar’s status as a Dalit and Buddhist icon that was stressed, with his role as the Constitution maker and India’s first law minister coming in as afterthoughts. But in recent years the full breadth of his intellectual concerns—including his views and writings on gender, economic theory, politics, philosophy and law—has received more focused, and welcome, attention.

Ambedkar was born in Mhow town, now in the state of Madhya Pradesh. He was the 14th child of Ramji Sakpal and Bhimabai, who belonged to Ratnagiri district in what is now Maharashtra state. Ramji served in the Army at Mhow. Since the family were of the Mahar (or so-called untouchable) caste, they often faced discrimination.

The young Ambedkar got first-hand experience of caste-based segregation at school, as boys of his caste were not allowed to touch drinking water or the water container, and a peon had to pour water to them from a height to prevent ‘pollution’. Ambedkar later described this childhood humiliation in his own words: “I could not touch the tap; and unless it was opened […] by a touchable person, it was not possible for me to quench my thirst. […] The presence of the school peon was necessary, for he was the only person whom the class teacher could use for such a purpose. If the peon was not available, I had to go without water […] — no peon, no water.”

In 1907, he entered University of Bombay’s Elphinstone College. After getting a degree in economics and political science, he went to the United States on a scholarship. He majored in Economics and also studied Philosophy, Anthropology, Sociology and History. He read his paper ‘Castes in India: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development’ at a seminar held by an anthropologist. In 1916 he started work on a doctoral thesis at the London School of Economics.

The time in the United States, free of caste discrimination, was crucial in Ambedkar’s intellectual growth. “The best friends I have had in life were some of my classmates at Columbia and my great professors, John Dewey, James Shotwell, Edwin Seligman, and James Harvey Robinson,” he would later say.

On his return to India, after being unable to work with the Princely State of Baroda, he took up several jobs, but caste-based prejudice often came in the way of his work. Shockingly, even when he became a professor in Bombay’s prestigious Sydenham College of Commerce and Economics, discrimination reared its ugly head, with fellow professors refusing to share the water jug with him.

On an invitation to a hearing before a government committee, Ambedkar said he was in favour of creating separate electorates and reservations for untouchables and religious minorities. He also started publishing a weekly magazine. Later, while practising law in Bombay, he became actively involved in Dalit rights, and from now on was an undisputed leader of the community. Meanwhile, being a prominent lawyer and thinker, he wrote a set of recommendations for the future Constitution of India.

By the late 1920s, Ambedkar’s anti-discrimination campaigns on sharing public water resources and the right to enter temples gathered momentum. In 1930 he led thousands of activists to the Kalaram Temple in Nashik, demanding access to the temple.

In 1932, Ambedkar reluctantly agreed to Mahatma Gandhi’s plea to drop the demand for a separate electorate for the untouchables, in what came to be called as the Poona Pact. From 1935 onwards, Ambedkar told his followers to find justice outside the folds of Hinduism. The following year he founded the Independent Labour Party. His famous book, The Annihilation of Caste, was published in 1937.

In acknowledgment of his intellectual capacity and legal acumen, Ambedkar was made Independent India’s first law minister and the chairman of the body in charge of writing the country’s new Constitution. He resigned from the Cabinet after his draft of the Hindu Code Bill was stalled, but was later appointed to the Rajya Sabha. He passed away on 6 December 1956. The day is celebrated as Dhamma Chakra Pravartan Din.

Ambedkar was deeply conscious of the dangers of social and economic inequality, and his words ring true even today: “How long shall we continue to deny equality in our social and economic life? If we continue to deny it for long, we will do so only by putting our political democracy in peril,” he said when India was becoming a republic. “We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so laboriously built up.”

Also on this day:

1981 — Gautam Gambhir, Indian cricketer, was born

2004 — Dattopant Thengadi, founder of the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch and Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, passed away

http://www.thecitizen.in/index.php/NewsDetail/index/7/7607/Why-are-Women-Not-Allowed-In-RSS-Shakhas
Why are Women Not Allowed In RSS Shakhas?
Women are not allowed in RSS shakhas. According to Ragini Nayak, the Sangh Parivar continues to invoke citations like Pita rakshati kaumare bharta rakshati yauvane, rakshanti sthavire putra na stri swaatantryamarhati (A woman is protected by her father in her childhood, by her husband in her youth and by her son in her old age. A woman does not deserve to be independent) as propounded in the Manusmriti to restrict women’s social space, limit their autonomy and control their choices.

Rakshasa / Rowdy Swayam sevaks are violent, militant, shooting, lynching, lunatic, mentally retarded just 1% cannibal chitpavan brahmins. They are aware that those who take dagger in their hands will end with the same dagger. Women take knife to cut vegetables to cook for their children or brothers or husband but not to cut the throats of other living beings and therefore, they will not join RSS.

Now we move on to examine Hindu Religious Practices like Yagna, and Dana and Gotra

https://hinduismexposed.wordpress.com/women-in-hinduism/
Women In Hinduism
WOMEN IN HINDUISM

Inequity and degradation of women are sanctified in the Hindu religion. Manu Smriti says:
Never trust a woman. Never sit alone with a woman even if it may be your mother, she may tempt you. Do not sit alone with your daughter, she may tempt you. Do not sit alone with your sister, she may tempt you.

Again the same Manu Smriti continues:

“Na stree swadantriya marhathi”. “No liberty for women in society”.

Now, that is most disgusting!!! This sick pervert actually insinuates that one’s own mother will tempt him! Na’oothu billahi minash-shaytaanir-rajeem!!!

Now see the verses of “Sacred” Hinduism Literature about women

Women = Dogs = Sudras = Untruth

“And whilst not coming into contact with Sûdras and remains of food; for this Gharma is he that shines yonder, and he is excellence, truth, and light; but woman, the Sûdra, the dog, and the black bird (the crow), are untruth: he should not look at these, lest he should mingle excellence and sin, light and darkness, truth and untruth.”

(Satapatha Brahmana 14:1:1:31)

Women are dumb !

“Indra himself hath said, The mind of woman brooks not discipline, her intellect hath little weight.”

(Rig Veda 8:33:17)

Women r powerless n have no inheritence !

“they could not discern the world of heaven, they saw this (cup) for the wives, they drew it; then indeed did they discern the world of heaven; in that (the cup) for the wives is drawn, (it serves) to reveal the world of heaven. Soma could not bear being drawn for women; making the ghee a bolt they beat it, they drew it when it had lost its power; therefore women are powerless, have no inheritance, and speak more humbly than even a bad man”

(Yajur Veda – Taittiriya Samhita 6:5:8:2)

A wife without a son is a discarded wife !

“And on the following day he goes to the house of a discarded (wife), and prepares a pap for Nirriti;–a discarded wife is one who has no son. He cooks the pap for Nirriti of black rice, after splitting the grains with his nails. He offers it with, ‘This, O Nirriti, is thy share: accept it graciously, hail!’ For a wife that is without a son, is possessed with Nirriti (destruction, calamity)“

(Satapatha Brahmana 5:3:1:13)

Women = Idiots = Animals = Untrustworthy

“At the time of consultation he should have removed idiots, the mute, blind, or deaf; animals and very old people; women, barbarians, and those who are ill or who lack a part of the body.”

“(Such) despicable (persons), likewise animals and especially women betray secret council; therefore he should be cautious among them.”

(Manusmrti 7:149-150)

Women r not fit for independence !

“Men must keep their women dependent day and night, and keep under their own control those who are attached to sensory objects. Her father guards her in childhood, her husband guards her in youth, and her sons guard her in old age. A woman is never fit for independence.”

(Manusmrti 9:2-4)

All women think like whores !

“Women donot care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age (thinking)“It is enough he is a man.” They give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly.”

“Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal to their husbands, however they may be carefully guarded over this.”

(Manusmrti 9:14-15)

HINDU WOMEN VS MUSLIM WOMEN

The Brahmin media made a big campaign recently out of the Shah Banu case and they blew it out of all proportion. They implied that Islam restricted 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.

Racial Secret Service*
*( RSS )*
The RSS (Rakshasa Swayam Sevaks) of chitpavan brahmins are by nature and because they are not the aboriginal inhabitants of Jambudvipa are timid and scared because of their violent nature and are sure that they will land in mental asylums because of their violent, militant, lunatic, mentally retarded action, full of hatred, anger, jealousy, delusion which are defilement of the mind. They themselves will run back from where they came for their safety and survival. Already scrimishes started between Murderer of democratic institutions (Modi) and the RSS (Rakshasa Swayam Sevaks) who are using him as use and throw curry leaves.

Anyone with self respect, dignity and honour will never stay with RSS. Only chamchas, stooges, slaves, chelas, boot lickers and own mother’s flesh eaters will remain with them.
Notable people

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (About this sound pronunciation ) (28 May 1883 – 26 February 1966, commonly known as Swatantryaveer Savarkar[2]) was an Indian pro-independence activist,[3][4] lawyer, politician, poet, writer and playwright. He advocated the reconversion of the converted Hindus back to Hindu religion. Savarkar coined the term Hindutva (Hinduness) to create a collective “Hindu” identity as an essence of Bharat (India). His political philosophy had the elements of utilitarianism, rationalism and positivism, humanism and universalism, pragmatism and realism.[5] . [6] Savarkar was also an atheist and a staunch rationalist who disapproved of orthodox beliefs in all religions[7]

Nathuram Godse
Nathuram Vinayak Godse (19 May 1910 – 15 November 1949) was a right wing advocate of Hindu nationalism who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, shooting him in the chest three times at point blank range in New Delhi on 30 January 1948.[1] Godse, an ex Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh member from Pune[2], Maharashtra, thought Gandhi favored the political demands of India’s Muslims during the partition of India. He plotted the assassination with Narayan Apte and six others. After a trial that lasted over a year, Godse was sentenced to death on 8 November 1949. Although pleas for commutation were made by Gandhi’s two sons, Manilal Gandhi and Ramdas Gandhi, they were turned down by India’s prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, deputy prime minister Vallabhbhai Patel and the Governor-General Chakravarti Rajagopalachari,[3] and Godse was hanged in the Ambala jail on 15 November

Nathuram Vinayak Godse (19 May 1910 – 15 November 1949) was a right wing advocate of Hindu nationalism who assassinated Mahatma Gandhi, shooting him in the chest three times at point blank range in New Delhi on 30 January 1948.[1] Godse, an ex Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh member from Pune[2], Maharashtra, thought Gandhi favored the political demands of India’s Muslims during the partition of India. He plotted the assassination with Narayan Apte and six others. After a trial that lasted over a year, Godse was sentenced to death on 8 November 1949. Although pleas for commutation were made by Gandhi’s two sons, Manilal Gandhi and Ramdas Gandhi, they were turned down by India’s prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru, deputy prime minister Vallabhbhai Patel and the Governor-General Chakravarti Rajagopalachari,[3] and Godse was hanged in the Ambala jail on 15 November 1949.[4]

Nathuram Vinayak Godse
Nathuram Godse
Nathuram Godse at his trial for the murder of Mahatma Gandhi
Born Ramachandra Vinayak Godse
19 May 1910
Baramati, Pune district, Bombay Presidency, British India
(now in Maharashtra, India)
Died 15 November 1949 (aged 39)
Ambala Prison, East Punjab, India
(now in Haryana, India)
Cause of death Execution by hanging
Nationality Indian
Organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh
Hindu Mahasabha
Criminal charge Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi
Criminal penalty Death
Criminal status Executed
Early life
Political career and beliefs
RSS membership
Godse joined RSS in Sangli (Maharashtra) in 1932 as a boudhik karyawah (ground worker), and simultaneously remained a member of the Hindu Mahasabha, both right wing organizations that occasionally participated in the freedom struggle. He participated in protest marches including the protests of 1938-39 in Bhagyanagar against the Nizam of Hyderabad who was trying to turn Hyderabad into an Islamic state for which he was jailed for a short duration. He often wrote articles in newspapers to publicise his thoughts. During this time, Godse and Golwalkar (the RSS Sarsangchalak) often worked together, and they translated Babarao Savarkar’s book “Rashtra Mimansa” into English. However, their relations soured when Golwalkar took the entire credit for this translation. In early 1940s, Godse formed his own organization called “Hindu Rashtra dal”[13] on the Vijayadashami day of 1942, though he continued to remain a member of the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha.[2]

In 1946, Godse left the RSS and Hindu Mahasabha over the issue of the partition of India. His relations with many members of the RSS soured, and he felt that the RSS was softening in its stance.[14][15]

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www.rvcj.com/rss-in-the-list-of-biggest-terrorist-organisation-in-the-world/amp/

RSS In The List Of Biggest Terrorist Organisation In The World

This may come as a shock to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, but for America they are one of the biggest terrorist organisation running in India. As per an US risk management company, RSS is “a shadowy, discriminatory group that seeks to establish a Hindu Rashtra, a Hindu Nation.”

The survey conducted by Terrorism Watch & Warning that provides intelligence, research, analysis, watch and warning on international terrorism and domestic terrorism related issues; and is operated by OODA Group LLC included in its “Threat Group” in April 2014.
The report have stated – “The RSS is a shadowy, discriminatory group that seeks to establish a Hindu Rashtra, a Hindu Nation. The group is considered the radical ideological parent group of India’s ruling Hindu nationalist party – the Indian Peoples Party (BJP).”

Talking about the terrorist activity RSS perform, the website further added, “Violence has been a strategy for the Sangh movement. It is often couched as a method of self-defense against minority groups. Hindutva has been clear about the need for violence, particularly communal riots. The Sangh has incited rioting to cause further chasms between religions, and thus a further separation of religions, and to rally the Hindu community around the philosophy of HinduThe reports presented database on terrorism and safety related issues and somewhere down the line RSS fitted their bill. What do you think is the reason for the inclusion of RSS? Ain’t other terrorist groups more dangerous and have spread terror.

What do you have to say about terrorism and also, the role RSS plays in the list of Terror
RSS In The List Of Biggest Terrorist Organisation In The World
This may come as a shock to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, but for America they are one of the biggest terrorist organisation running in India. As per an US risk management company, RSS is “a shadowy, discriminatory group that seeks to establish a Hindu Rashtra, a Hindu Nation.”

The survey conducted by Terrorism Watch & Warning that provides intelligence, research, analysis, watch and warning on international terrorism and domestic terrorism related issues; and is operated by OODA Group LLC included in its “Threat Group” in April 2014 but after the BJP led government came to power the details have been altered.

The report have stated – “The RSS is a shadowy, discriminatory group that seeks to establish a Hindu Rashtra, a Hindu Nation. The group is considered the radical ideological parent group of India’s ruling Hindu nationalist party – the Indian Peoples Party (BJP).”

Talking about the terrorist activity RSS perform, the website further added, “Violence has been a strategy for the Sangh movement. It is often couched as a method of self-defense against minority groups. Hindutva has been clear about the need for violence, particularly communal riots. The Sangh has incited rioting to cause further chasms between religions, and thus a further separation of religions, and to rally the Hindu community around the philosophy of Hindutva.”

The reports presented database on terrorism and safety related issues and somewhere down the line RSS fitted their bill. What do you think is the reason for the inclusion of RSS? Ain’t other terrorist groups more dangerous and have spread terror.

What do you have to say about terrorism and also, the role RSS plays in the list of Terror groups?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitpavan

Chitpavan
The Chitpavan Brahmin or Kokanastha Brahmin (i.e. “Brahmins native to the Konkan”), is a Hindu Brahmin community from Konkan, the coastal region of the state of Maharashtra in India. The community came into prominence during the 18th century when the heirs of Peshwa from the Bhat family of Balaji Vishwanath became the de facto rulers of the Maratha empire.[2] Under the British Raj, they were the one of the Hindu community in Maharashtra to flock to western education and as such they provided the bulk of social reformers, educationalists and nationalists of the late 19th century.[3] Until the 18th century, the Chitpavans were held in low esteem by the Deshastha.

comments (0)
2406 Thu 12 Oct 2017 LESSON EDUCATE! ORGANISE! CONTRIBUTE! while LEARNING! MBBT (Mind Body Beauty Thersphy) INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through http://sarvajan.ambedar.org in
105 languages http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org Google’s free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages. and render correct translation in your mother tongue for this google translation to attain Eternal Bliss as Final goal.
Filed under: General
Posted by: @ 12:09 am

2406 Thu 12 Oct 2017 LESSON

EDUCATE! ORGANISE! CONTRIBUTE! while LEARNING!

MBBT

(Mind Body Beauty Thersphy)

INSIGHT-NET - FREE Online Tipiṭaka Research & Practice University and related NEWS through http://sarvajan.ambedar.org in
105 languages http://sarvajan.ambedkar.org Google’s free service instantly translates words, phrases, and web pages between English and over 100 other languages. and render correct translation in your mother tongue for this google translation to attain Eternal Bliss as Final goal.

Child marriage and other old customs followed:

http://www.hindubooks.org/sudheer_birodkar/hindu_history/practices1.html
Dear Visitor,
I welcome you to this non-profit, educational page. Here you will read about different aspects of the history and culture of that part of our globe which is known variously as Bharatvarsha, Hindostan or India. My approach of looking at history is that of a rationalist and humanist. As my aim is to spread awareness about history and culture, you may freely download this page, print it, link it up from your site, or mirror it at any server. Enjoy the infotainment laid out for you at this site. I also look forward to your valuable suggestions and feedback. Happy viewing.
Author
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Hindu Social Customs

- Dowry, Sati and Child Marriage

by Sudheer Birodkar

________________________________________________________
Table of Contents

_________________________________________________

Dahej or Hunda - Dowry and Bride-Price

Dowry is one of those social practices which no educated Indian would own up with pride, although many of us still adhere to this much deplorable practice. Dowry continues to be given and taken . Even among the educated sections of society, dowry continues to form an essential part the negotiations that take place in an arranged marriage. During the marriage ceremony the articles comprising thc dowry are proudly displayed in the wedding hall. Dowry is still very much a status symbol. A number of marriage-negotiations break down if there is no consensus between the bride’s and groom’ s families. Dowry deaths of a newly married bride are still regularly in the news.

Although the practice of dowry exists in many countries, it has assumed the proportion of a challenge to the forces of modernity and change only in India. Many reasons are put forward for explaining this practice. It is said that a dowry is meant to help the newly-weds to set up their own home.

That dowry is given as compensation to the groom’s parents for the amount they have spent in educating and upbringing their son. These explanations may seem logical in the present day context, but they cannot explain how this practice originated. A search for the origins of dowry would have to move backwards into antiquity. Discussion about dowry has to take into account the less prevalent practice of bride price, which is but a reversal or dowry. Although it may not be possible to ascertain when and where these practices originated, it can be supposed that dowry and bride price are posterior to the institution of monogamy. This is the same as saying that dowry and bride price came into being after the practice of monogamous marriage had become prevalent.

But monogamous marriage is itself a culmination of the human adaptation of animal promiscuity. Man’s is the only species practicing monogamy, all other species are promiscuous. Thus it is a logical corollary that Man’s institution of monogamy came into being at sometime in the long evolution of his species. The practice of monogamy itself evolved in stages as is evident from historical anecdotes as in the Mahabharata where the five Pandava brothers have one wife.

Promiscuity gave way to Polygamy/polyandry, and after various permutations and combinations, monogamy became the established system. As long as promiscuity existed there was no question of dowry or bride price. The origin of these two practices could be linked up with the discarding of promiscuity in favour of Polygamy and Polyandry. These two forms of marriage are themselves mutual opposites. While in polygamy there is pairing between one male and But the existence of the diametrically opposite practices of dowry and bride price, possibly owe their origin to polygamy and polyandry. The formation of polygamous and polyandrous forms of marriage could have been made necessary by changes in the demographic balance between the sexes. A rise in the number of females as compared to that of males is a congenial situation for the emergence of polygamy. Mere the chances of more than one female member of society being in wedlock with one male member are more.

In Absence of polygamy, in a society having a larger number of females as compared to males, many female members would have to deprived of marital life. The obligation to get more than one female member into wedlock with one male member could have been the situation which gave birth to dowry as a price exacted by the male and his family from the female’s family.

The origin of bride-price could have taken place in opposite circumstances where the sex ratio favoured females and as there was a large number of males for every female, polyandry and bride-price could have been the result.

Along with this generalised hypothesis there were many factors specific to different situations which gave birth to dowry and bride-price. These factors can be identified with more certainty. In India’ s context, these practices can be seen to be a result of the dialectics of our caste system. The conflict of opposing tendencies of the caste hierarchy, as we know have resulted in endogamy, preventing inter-marriage between members of different castes. A reason for the origin of dowry and bride-price can also he seen in the same conflict. Hence discussion on these two practices would have to be intertwined.

Child marriage and other old customs followed:

http://www.hindubooks.org/sudheer_birodkar/hindu_history/practices1.html
Dear Visitor,
I welcome you to this non-profit, educational page. Here you will read about different aspects of the history and culture of that part of our globe which is known variously as Bharatvarsha, Hindostan or India. My approach of looking at history is that of a rationalist and humanist. As my aim is to spread awareness about history and culture, you may freely download this page, print it, link it up from your site, or mirror it at any server. Enjoy the infotainment laid out for you at this site. I also look forward to your valuable suggestions and feedback. Happy viewing.
Author
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Hindu Social Customs

- Dowry, Sati and Child Marriage

by Sudheer Birodkar

________________________________________________________
Table of Contents

_________________________________________________

Dahej or Hunda - Dowry and Bride-Price

Dowry is one of those social practices which no educated Indian would own up with pride, although many of us still adhere to this much deplorable practice. Dowry continues to be given and taken . Even among the educated sections of society, dowry continues to form an essential part the negotiations that take place in an arranged marriage. During the marriage ceremony the articles comprising thc dowry are proudly displayed in the wedding hall. Dowry is still very much a status symbol. A number of marriage-negotiations break down if there is no consensus between the bride’s and groom’ s families. Dowry deaths of a newly married bride are still regularly in the news.

Although the practice of dowry exists in many countries, it has assumed the proportion of a challenge to the forces of modernity and change only in India. Many reasons are put forward for explaining this practice. It is said that a dowry is meant to help the newly-weds to set up their own home.

That dowry is given as compensation to the groom’s parents for the amount they have spent in educating and upbringing their son. These explanations may seem logical in the present day context, but they cannot explain how this practice originated. A search for the origins of dowry would have to move backwards into antiquity. Discussion about dowry has to take into account the less prevalent practice of bride price, which is but a reversal or dowry. Although it may not be possible to ascertain when and where these practices originated, it can be supposed that dowry and bride price are posterior to the institution of monogamy. This is the same as saying that dowry and bride price came into being after the practice of monogamous marriage had become prevalent.

But monogamous marriage is itself a culmination of the human adaptation of animal promiscuity. Man’s is the only species practicing monogamy, all other species are promiscuous. Thus it is a logical corollary that Man’s institution of monogamy came into being at sometime in the long evolution of his species. The practice of monogamy itself evolved in stages as is evident from historical anecdotes as in the Mahabharata where the five Pandava brothers have one wife.

Promiscuity gave way to Polygamy/polyandry, and after various permutations and combinations, monogamy became the established system. As long as promiscuity existed there was no question of dowry or bride price. The origin of these two practices could be linked up with the discarding of promiscuity in favour of Polygamy and Polyandry. These two forms of marriage are themselves mutual opposites. While in polygamy there is pairing between one male and But the existence of the diametrically opposite practices of dowry and bride price, possibly owe their origin to polygamy and polyandry. The formation of polygamous and polyandrous forms of marriage could have been made necessary by changes in the demographic balance between the sexes. A rise in the number of females as compared to that of males is a congenial situation for the emergence of polygamy. Mere the chances of more than one female member of society being in wedlock with one male member are more.

In Absence of polygamy, in a society having a larger number of females as compared to males, many female members would have to deprived of marital life. The obligation to get more than one female member into wedlock with one male member could have been the situation which gave birth to dowry as a price exacted by the male and his family from the female’s family.

The origin of bride-price could have taken place in opposite circumstances where the sex ratio favoured females and as there was a large number of males for every female, polyandry and bride-price could have been the result.

Along with this generalised hypothesis there were many factors specific to different situations which gave birth to dowry and bride-price. These factors can be identified with more certainty. In India’ s context, these practices can be seen to be a result of the dialectics of our caste system. The conflict of opposing tendencies of the caste hierarchy, as we know have resulted in endogamy, preventing inter-marriage between members of different castes. A reason for the origin of dowry and bride-price can also he seen in the same conflict. Hence discussion on these two practices would have to be intertwined.

Dowry (Dahej/Hunda) as we all know is paid in cash or kind by the bride’s family to the groom’ s family alongwith the giving away of the bride (Kanya-dana). The ritual of Kanya-dana is an essential aspect in Hindu marital rites. Kanya = daughter, dana = gift. The word ‘Hunda’ appears to be derived from ‘Handa’ which means a pot. This could be due to the now extinct practice of offerring dowry in a pot.

Dowry (Dahej/Hunda) as we all know is paid in cash or kind by the bride’s family to the groom’ s family alongwith the giving away of the bride (Kanya-dana). The ritual of Kanya-dana is an essential aspect in Hindu marital rites: Kanya = daughter, dana = gift. A reason for the origin of dowry could perhaps be that the groom and his family had to take up the ‘onerous’ responsibility of supporting the bride for the rest of her life.

Bride-price on the other hand involves the receipt of presents, in cash or kind, by the bride’s family in return for giving away of the bride. Hence bride-price has the character of an exchange.

One feature about dowry and bride-price that is conspicuous is that dowry is prevalent among the higher castes while bride-price exists mainly among the lower castes and tribals (Adivasis). We can only conjecture as to why this curious combination could have come into being. In the caste hierarchy it was the lower castes, the Vaishya’s and Shudras who did most of the physical labour and menial work. lie have discussed in an earlier chapter that the various occupational divisions into Jatis exist only among these two castes. The two upper castes, the Brahmins and Kshatriyas had only priestly and martial duties allocated to them and hence no occupational sub-division existed among them.

Thus among the lower castes, the coming of a bride into the family meant an increase in the number of members ~ who could work along with other members and become a source of income for the family. While the family from where the bride came sufferred the loss of one earning member. Hence a bride-price was paid to the bride’s parents to compensate for this loss. Contrarily, among the higher castes to whom no manual labour was assigned in the caste hierarchy, the reverse logic applied.

A marriage meant an additional member who was to be supported and hence was a burden on the groom’s family as the bride did not go out to earn and contribute to the family income. Thus a dowry was collected to provide the additional burden resulting from a bride’s entry into the groom’s family.

Sati (Self-Immolation by a widow)

Sati i.e. self-immolation by a widow would normally be looked upon as a negative aspect of culture. When confronted with questions as to why such a practice should have existed, a student of history with misplaced national pride would try to explain away such practices.

According to Hindu mythology, Sati the wife of Dakhsha was so overcome at the demise of her husband that she immolated herself on his funeral pyre and burnt herself to ashes. Since then her name ‘Sati’ has come to be symptomatic of self-immolation by a widow.

Today Sati is illegal, it is also generally looked down upon but it continues to exist in the rural corners of our country. One still does hear of stray incidents of woman being forced to or trying to commit Sati. The country owes the abolition of this deplorable practice to the crusading efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy the 18th century social reformer.

Dowry (Dahej/Hunda) as we all know is paid in cash or kind by the bride’s family to the groom’ s family alongwith the giving away of the bride (Kanya-dana). The ritual of Kanya-dana is an essential aspect in Hindu marital rites. Kanya = daughter, dana = gift. The word ‘Hunda’ appears to be derived from ‘Handa’ which means a pot. This could be due to the now extinct practice of offerring dowry in a pot.

Dowry (Dahej/Hunda) as we all know is paid in cash or kind by the bride’s family to the groom’ s family alongwith the giving away of the bride (Kanya-dana). The ritual of Kanya-dana is an essential aspect in Hindu marital rites: Kanya = daughter, dana = gift. A reason for the origin of dowry could perhaps be that the groom and his family had to take up the ‘onerous’ responsibility of supporting the bride for the rest of her life.

Bride-price on the other hand involves the receipt of presents, in cash or kind, by the bride’s family in return for giving away of the bride. Hence bride-price has the character of an exchange.

One feature about dowry and bride-price that is conspicuous is that dowry is prevalent among the higher castes while bride-price exists mainly among the lower castes and tribals (Adivasis). We can only conjecture as to why this curious combination could have come into being. In the caste hierarchy it was the lower castes, the Vaishya’s and Shudras who did most of the physical labour and menial work. lie have discussed in an earlier chapter that the various occupational divisions into Jatis exist only among these two castes. The two upper castes, the Brahmins and Kshatriyas had only priestly and martial duties allocated to them and hence no occupational sub-division existed among them.

Thus among the lower castes, the coming of a bride into the family meant an increase in the number of members ~ who could work along with other members and become a source of income for the family. While the family from where the bride came sufferred the loss of one earning member. Hence a bride-price was paid to the bride’s parents to compensate for this loss. Contrarily, among the higher castes to whom no manual labour was assigned in the caste hierarchy, the reverse logic applied.

A marriage meant an additional member who was to be supported and hence was a burden on the groom’s family as the bride did not go out to earn and contribute to the family income. Thus a dowry was collected to provide the additional burden resulting from a bride’s entry into the groom’s family.

Sati (Self-Immolation by a widow)

Sati i.e. self-immolation by a widow would normally be looked upon as a negative aspect of culture. When confronted with questions as to why such a practice should have existed, a student of history with misplaced national pride would try to explain away such practices.

According to Hindu mythology, Sati the wife of Dakhsha was so overcome at the demise of her husband that she immolated herself on his funeral pyre and burnt herself to ashes. Since then her name ‘Sati’ has come to be symptomatic of self-immolation by a widow.

Today Sati is illegal, it is also generally looked down upon but it continues to exist in the rural corners of our country. One still does hear of stray incidents of woman being forced to or trying to commit Sati. The country owes the abolition of this deplorable practice to the crusading efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy the 18th century social reformer.

Hand-prints in a temple symbolizing women who have performed Sati. There are many monumets erected in the middle ages which are dedicated to those women who committed Sati (Jauhar) when their honour was in danger of being violated by Saracenic princelings. These temples are called Sati-Mata mandirs.

The reasons why this practice could have come into being are many. But the principal among them could be identified in the same milieu which gave birth to dowry. Closer examination of this practice of immolation supports this inference. Immolation as a widely prevalent practice can be seen only since the mediaeval period but there are reasons which trace its origins in antiquity.

Even a casual observer will notice that immolation is more prevalent among the higher martial caste. Among the lower castes and aboriginal tribes it is nearly absent. The prevalence of Sati among the higher castes is no co-incidence.

As mentioned earlier, among the higher castes, a bride was looked upon as a burden as she represented a drain On the family’s income while not contributing anything towards it. If this was her status as a bride, it is not surprising that if she had the misfortune to become a widow, her presence in the family was dreaded. And apart from being considered an object of ill omen, her presence after her husband demise was a dead weight to her in-laws family.

A widow’s status as an unwanted burden was also a result of the taboos that prevented a widow from participating in the house-hold work as her touch, her voice, her very appearance was considered unholy, impure and something that was to be shunned and abhorred. Thus without her husband a woman’s existence was not tolerated and an extreme but logical outcome of this was immolation.

Other auxiliary reasons also went into making immolation a prevalent practice. The near impossibility of widow re-marriage arising from the taboos and prejudices that sanctified virginity of a bride was an important reason. Another reason could be the non-recognition of the individuality of a woman who was considered part and parcel of her husband, without whom she was a nullity.

This attitude of looking at women is visible in the legal literature (Dharmashastra) of antiquity. The Manusmriti considered to be one of the most important legal texts guiding ancient Indian polity has injunctions which reflect this attitude. It says “a woman is undeserving for independence” (Ne stree svatantyam arahathi). Beliefs that a widow, especially a young one would fall into immoral practices for sensual pleasures was also used to stoke the fires of Sati. Strangely enough this logic was never applied to the stronger sex. Widowers were never an under-privileged lot.

But the most visible factor that perpetrated Sati was the ‘halo of honour’ given to it. Especially in the medieavel ages Sati was given the status of an act of honour. This was mainly so among the Rajput martial caste of northern India among whom Sati took the form of a collective suicide after a battle in which male members had suffered death at the enemy’s hands.

Sati was even committed by women before their husbands were actually death when their city or town was beseiged by the enemy and faced certain defeat. This form of Sati was more popularly known as Jouhar. The Jouhar committed by Rant Padmini of Chittor when faced by the prospect of dishonour at the hands of a Sultan from Delhi has been immortalised in Indian history.

In those days North India was under foreign subjugation. The most powerful kingdomset up by the invaders was the Sultanate of Delhi.

But in Rajputana, the Rajputs had defiantly preserved their writ by resisting the Delhi Sultans. One such Rajput kingdom was at Chittor. In those days of the aribitrary feudal power structure, any feudal lord who took a fancy for any lady would claim her for himself even at the cost of killing her husband if she happened to be married or even by waging a war if she was queen or princess. one such lady of unsurpassable beauty was the Rana of Chittor named Padmini.

Chittor was under the Rule of King Ratnasen, a brave and noble warrior-king. Apart, from being a loving husband and a just ruler, Ratansen was also a patron of the arts. In his court were many talented People one of whom was a musician named Raghav Chetan. But unknown to anybody, Raghav Chetan was also a sorcerer. He used his evil talents to run down his rivals and unfortunately for him was caught red-handed in his dirty act of arousing evil spirits.

On hearing this King Ratansen was furious and he banished Raghav Chetan from his kingdom after blackening his face with face and making him ride a donkey. This harsh Punishment earned king Ratansen an uncompromising enemy. Sulking after his humiliation, Raghav Chetan made his way towards Delhi with -the aim of trying to incite the Sultan of Delhi Allah-ud-din Khilji to attack Chittor.

On approaching Delhi, Raghav Chetan settled down in one of the forests nearby Delhi which the Sultan used to frequent for hunting deer. One day on hearing the Sultan’s hunt party entering the forest, Raghav-Chetan started playing a melodious tone on his flute. When the alluring notes of Raghav-Chetan flute reached the Sultan’s party they were surprised as to who could be playing a flute in such a masterly way in a forlorn forest.

The Sultan despatched his soldiers to fetch the person and when Raghav-Chetan was brought before him, the Sultan Allah-ud-din Khilji asked him to come to his court at Delhi. The cunning Raghav-Chetan asked the king as to why he wants to have a ordinary musician like himself when there were many other beautiful objects to be had. Wondering what Raghav-Chetan meant, Allah-ud-din asked him to clarify. Upon being told of Rani Padmini’s beauty, Allah-ud-din’s lust was aroused and immediately on returning to his capital he gave orders to his army to march on Chittor.

But to his dismay, on reaching Chittor, Allah-ud-din found the fort to be heavily defended. Desperate to have a look at the legendary beauty of Padmini, he sent word to King Ratansen that he looked upon Padmini as his sister and wanted to meet her. On hearing this, the unsuspecting Ratansen asked Padmini to see the ‘brother’. But Padmini was more wordly-wise and she refused to meet the lustful Sultan personally.

But on being persuaded she consented to allow Allah-ud-din to see her only in a mirror. On the word being sent to Allah-ud-din that Padmini would see him he came to the fort with his selected his best warriors who secretly made a careful examination of the fort’s defences on their way to the Palace.

Hand-prints in a temple symbolizing women who have performed Sati. There are many monumets erected in the middle ages which are dedicated to those women who committed Sati (Jauhar) when their honour was in danger of being violated by Saracenic princelings. These temples are called Sati-Mata mandirs.

The reasons why this practice could have come into being are many. But the principal among them could be identified in the same milieu which gave birth to dowry. Closer examination of this practice of immolation supports this inference. Immolation as a widely prevalent practice can be seen only since the mediaeval period but there are reasons which trace its origins in antiquity.

Even a casual observer will notice that immolation is more prevalent among the higher martial caste. Among the lower castes and aboriginal tribes it is nearly absent. The prevalence of Sati among the higher castes is no co-incidence.

As mentioned earlier, among the higher castes, a bride was looked upon as a burden as she represented a drain On the family’s income while not contributing anything towards it. If this was her status as a bride, it is not surprising that if she had the misfortune to become a widow, her presence in the family was dreaded. And apart from being considered an object of ill omen, her presence after her husband demise was a dead weight to her in-laws family.

A widow’s status as an unwanted burden was also a result of the taboos that prevented a widow from participating in the house-hold work as her touch, her voice, her very appearance was considered unholy, impure and something that was to be shunned and abhorred. Thus without her husband a woman’s existence was not tolerated and an extreme but logical outcome of this was immolation.

Other auxiliary reasons also went into making immolation a prevalent practice. The near impossibility of widow re-marriage arising from the taboos and prejudices that sanctified virginity of a bride was an important reason. Another reason could be the non-recognition of the individuality of a woman who was considered part and parcel of her husband, without whom she was a nullity.

This attitude of looking at women is visible in the legal literature (Dharmashastra) of antiquity. The Manusmriti considered to be one of the most important legal texts guiding ancient Indian polity has injunctions which reflect this attitude. It says “a woman is undeserving for independence” (Ne stree svatantyam arahathi). Beliefs that a widow, especially a young one would fall into immoral practices for sensual pleasures was also used to stoke the fires of Sati. Strangely enough this logic was never applied to the stronger sex. Widowers were never an under-privileged lot.

But the most visible factor that perpetrated Sati was the ‘halo of honour’ given to it. Especially in the medieavel ages Sati was given the status of an act of honour. This was mainly so among the Rajput martial caste of northern India among whom Sati took the form of a collective suicide after a battle in which male members had suffered death at the enemy’s hands.

Sati was even committed by women before their husbands were actually death when their city or town was beseiged by the enemy and faced certain defeat. This form of Sati was more popularly known as Jouhar. The Jouhar committed by Rant Padmini of Chittor when faced by the prospect of dishonour at the hands of a Sultan from Delhi has been immortalised in Indian history.

In those days North India was under foreign subjugation. The most powerful kingdomset up by the invaders was the Sultanate of Delhi.

But in Rajputana, the Rajputs had defiantly preserved their writ by resisting the Delhi Sultans. One such Rajput kingdom was at Chittor. In those days of the aribitrary feudal power structure, any feudal lord who took a fancy for any lady would claim her for himself even at the cost of killing her husband if she happened to be married or even by waging a war if she was queen or princess. one such lady of unsurpassable beauty was the Rana of Chittor named Padmini.

Chittor was under the Rule of King Ratnasen, a brave and noble warrior-king. Apart, from being a loving husband and a just ruler, Ratansen was also a patron of the arts. In his court were many talented People one of whom was a musician named Raghav Chetan. But unknown to anybody, Raghav Chetan was also a sorcerer. He used his evil talents to run down his rivals and unfortunately for him was caught red-handed in his dirty act of arousing evil spirits.

On hearing this King Ratansen was furious and he banished Raghav Chetan from his kingdom after blackening his face with face and making him ride a donkey. This harsh Punishment earned king Ratansen an uncompromising enemy. Sulking after his humiliation, Raghav Chetan made his way towards Delhi with -the aim of trying to incite the Sultan of Delhi Allah-ud-din Khilji to attack Chittor.

On approaching Delhi, Raghav Chetan settled down in one of the forests nearby Delhi which the Sultan used to frequent for hunting deer. One day on hearing the Sultan’s hunt party entering the forest, Raghav-Chetan started playing a melodious tone on his flute. When the alluring notes of Raghav-Chetan flute reached the Sultan’s party they were surprised as to who could be playing a flute in such a masterly way in a forlorn forest.

The Sultan despatched his soldiers to fetch the person and when Raghav-Chetan was brought before him, the Sultan Allah-ud-din Khilji asked him to come to his court at Delhi. The cunning Raghav-Chetan asked the king as to why he wants to have a ordinary musician like himself when there were many other beautiful objects to be had. Wondering what Raghav-Chetan meant, Allah-ud-din asked him to clarify. Upon being told of Rani Padmini’s beauty, Allah-ud-din’s lust was aroused and immediately on returning to his capital he gave orders to his army to march on Chittor.

But to his dismay, on reaching Chittor, Allah-ud-din found the fort to be heavily defended. Desperate to have a look at the legendary beauty of Padmini, he sent word to King Ratansen that he looked upon Padmini as his sister and wanted to meet her. On hearing this, the unsuspecting Ratansen asked Padmini to see the ‘brother’. But Padmini was more wordly-wise and she refused to meet the lustful Sultan personally.

But on being persuaded she consented to allow Allah-ud-din to see her only in a mirror. On the word being sent to Allah-ud-din that Padmini would see him he came to the fort with his selected his best warriors who secretly made a careful examination of the fort’s defences on their way to the Palace.

On seeing Padmini, in the mirror, the lustful ‘brother’, Allah-ud-din Khilji decided that he should secure Padmini for himself. While returning to his camp, Allah-ud-din was accompanied for some way by King Ratansen. Taking this opportunity, the wily Sultan treacherously kidnapped Ratansen and took him as a prisoner into his camp and demanded that Padmini come and surrender herself before Allah-ud-din Khilji, if she wanted her husband King Ratansen alive again.

On seeing Padmini, the lustful ‘brother’ decided that he should secure Padmini for himself. While returning to his camp, Allah-ud-din was accompanied for some way by King Ratansen. Taking this opportunity, the wily Sultan treacherously kidnapped Ratansen and took him as a prisoner into his camp.

Allah-ud-din showed his true colours and demanded , that Padmini be given to him and in return Ratnasen was to get his liberty. Word was sent into the palace about the Sultan’s demand.

The Rajput generals decided to beast the Sultan at his own game and sent back a word that Padmini would be given to Ala-ud-din the next morning. On the following day at the crack of dawn, one hundred and fifity palaquins (covered cases in which royal ladies were carried in medieveal times) left the fort and made their way towards Ala-ud-din’s camps The palanquins stopped before the tent where king Ratansen was being held prisoner. . Seeing that the palanquins had come from Chittor; and thinking that they had brought along with them his queen, king Ratansen was mortified. But to his surprise from the palanquins came out, not his queen and her women servants but fully armed soldiers, who quickly freed ; Ratansen and galloped away towards Chittor on horses grabbed from Ala-ud-din’s stables.

On hearing that his designs had been frustrated, the lustful Sultan was furious and ordered his army to storm Chittor. But hard as they tried the Sultans army could not break into the fort. Then Ala-ud-din decided to lay seige to the fort. The siege was a long drawn one and gradually supplied within the fort were depleted. Finally King Ratnasen gave orders that the Rajputs would open the gates and fight to finish with the besieging troops. On hearing of this decision, Padmini decided that with their menfolk going into the unequal struggle with the Sultan’s army in which they were sure to perish, the women of Chittor had either to commit suicides or face dishonour at the hands of the victorious enemy.

The choice was in favour of suicide through Jauhar. A huge pyre was lit and followed by their queen, all the women of Chittor jumped into the flames and deceived the lustful enemy waiting outside. With their womenfolk dead, the men of Chittor had nothing to live for. Their charged out of the fort and fought on furiously with the vastly Powerful array of the Sultan, till all of them perished. After this phyrrhic victory the Sultan’s troops entered the fort only to be confronted with ashes and burnt bones of the women whose honour they were going to violate to satisfy their lust.

These women who committed Jawhar had to perish but theirmemory has been kept alive till today by bards and songs which glorify their act which was right in those days and circumstances. Thus a halo of honour is given to their supreme sacrifice.

But this halo of honour has to be seen in the light of the above complusions of alien rule in Inda during the medieveal ages. From the 13th century onwards up to the coming of the British, the position of women was insecure due to the arbitrary power structure associated with the feudal society and the rule of the Sultans of Delhi. Although during the reign of the later Mughals the situation had improved relatively, women in the medieaval ages were often exposed to the lust of feudal overlords. Their insecurity increased after the demise of their husbands. This compulsion which was resultant of a particular age was by far the most important reason for the prevalence of Sati during the middle ages.

Although the Mughal emperor Akbar tried to curb this practice, he could not eradicate it completely. As long as circumstances made necessary the existence of such an anomalous and inhuman practice, all efforts to stamp it out were bound to fail. But with the passing of the feudal power structure and entry of the industrial age under the British, the compulsions of the medieaval age which helped the existence of Sati were no longer there. Hence the efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy succeeded while those of emperor Akbar could not.

One last reason that needs to be mentioned in this context is that of grief and remorse experienced by a widowed lady. Women as such are more sensitive and emotional than menu This explains in part the readiness of some woman to commit Sati. But it should be borne in mind that the proportion of voluntary Sati was far less and the reasons behind voluntary Sati Though facts were blown out of proportion to justify this practice. However, in conclusion it can be observed that a complexity of factors contributed over different periods to make Sati a prevalent custom.

CHILD-MARRIAGE (Bal Vivaha)

Child-marriage is another ‘blessing’ of the medieaval age and it was born from the same compulsions that ; perpetuated Sati.Child-marriage was not not prevalent in ancient India. The most popular form of marriage was Swayamvara where grooms assembled at the bride’ s house and the bride selected her spouse. Svayam-vara can be translated as self selection of one’ s husband, Svayam = self, Vara = husband. Instances of Swayamvara ceremony are found in our national epics, the Ramayana and Mahabharata. Various types of marraiges wereprevalant in ancient India Gandharva Vivaha (love marriage), Asura Viviha (marriage by abduction) etc., But among these Bal-Viviha is conspicuous its absence.

There are many reasons to believe that this custom originated in the medieval ages. As mentioned earlier in the turbulent atmosphere of the medieavel ages, law and order was not yet a universal phenomenon and arbitrary powers were concentrated in the hands of a hierarchy led by a despotic monarch. In India the Sultans of Delhi who held the place of the despotic monarch, came from a different type of culture. They were orthodox in their beliefs with a fanatical commitment to their religion and a ruthless method in its propagation. Intolerant as they were to all forms of worship other than their own, they also exercised contempt for members of other faiths. (See note at the end of this chapter).

Women as it is are at the receiving and during any war, arson, plunder, etc. During the reign of the Delhi Sultans these were the order of the day and the worst sufferers were Hindu women. During these dark days were spawned customs like child-marriage and selection of women from the rest of the society, wearing of the Ghungat (veil). This age also perpetuated customs like Sati and looking upon the birth of a female baby as an ill omen, even killing newly born baby girls by drowning them in a tub of milk. Amidst the feeling of insecurity, the presence of young unmarried girls was a potential invitation for disaster.

The predatory Sarasenic feudal lords and princelings of Sarasenic origins who stalked all over India in the middle ages were a source of constant threat . Hence parents would seek to get over with the responsibilities of their daughters by getting them married off before they reached the marriage age. The custom of child marriages with the ‘bride’ and ‘groom’ still in their cradles was a culmination of this tendency. This way the danger to a growing girl’s virginity was somewhat reduced.

On seeing Padmini, in the mirror, the lustful ‘brother’, Allah-ud-din Khilji decided that he should secure Padmini for himself. While returning to his camp, Allah-ud-din was accompanied for some way by King Ratansen. Taking this opportunity, the wily Sultan treacherously kidnapped Ratansen and took him as a prisoner into his camp and demanded that Padmini come and surrender herself before Allah-ud-din Khilji, if she wanted her husband King Ratansen alive again.

On seeing Padmini, the lustful ‘brother’ decided that he should secure Padmini for himself. While returning to his camp, Allah-ud-din was accompanied for some way by King Ratansen. Taking this opportunity, the wily Sultan treacherously kidnapped Ratansen and took him as a prisoner into his camp.

Allah-ud-din showed his true colours and demanded , that Padmini be given to him and in return Ratnasen was to get his liberty. Word was sent into the palace about the Sultan’s demand.

The Rajput generals decided to beast the Sultan at his own game and sent back a word that Padmini would be given to Ala-ud-din the next morning. On the following day at the crack of dawn, one hundred and fifity palaquins (covered cases in which royal ladies were carried in medieveal times) left the fort and made their way towards Ala-ud-din’s camps The palanquins stopped before the tent where king Ratansen was being held prisoner. . Seeing that the palanquins had come from Chittor; and thinking that they had brought along with them his queen, king Ratansen was mortified. But to his surprise from the palanquins came out, not his queen and her women servants but fully armed soldiers, who quickly freed ; Ratansen and galloped away towards Chittor on horses grabbed from Ala-ud-din’s stables.

On hearing that his designs had been frustrated, the lustful Sultan was furious and ordered his army to storm Chittor. But hard as they tried the Sultans army could not break into the fort. Then Ala-ud-din decided to lay seige to the fort. The siege was a long drawn one and gradually supplied within the fort were depleted. Finally King Ratnasen gave orders that the Rajputs would open the gates and fight to finish with the besieging troops. On hearing of this decision, Padmini decided that with their menfolk going into the unequal struggle with the Sultan’s army in which they were sure to perish, the women of Chittor had either to commit suicides or face dishonour at the hands of the victorious enemy.

The choice was in favour of suicide through Jauhar. A huge pyre was lit and followed by their queen, all the women of Chittor jumped into the flames and deceived the lustful enemy waiting outside. With their womenfolk dead, the men of Chittor had nothing to live for. Their charged out of the fort and fought on furiously with the vastly Powerful array of the Sultan, till all of them perished. After this phyrrhic victory the Sultan’s troops entered the fort only to be confronted with ashes and burnt bones of the women whose honour they were going to violate to satisfy their lust.

These women who committed Jawhar had to perish but theirmemory has been kept alive till today by bards and songs which glorify their act which was right in those days and circumstances. Thus a halo of honour is given to their supreme sacrifice.

But this halo of honour has to be seen in the light of the above complusions of alien rule in Inda during the medieveal ages. From the 13th century onwards up to the coming of the British, the position of women was insecure due to the arbitrary power structure associated with the feudal society and the rule of the Sultans of Delhi. Although during the reign of the later Mughals the situation had improved relatively, women in the medieaval ages were often exposed to the lust of feudal overlords. Their insecurity increased after the demise of their husbands. This compulsion which was resultant of a particular age was by far the most important reason for the prevalence of Sati during the middle ages.

Although the Mughal emperor Akbar tried to curb this practice, he could not eradicate it completely. As long as circumstances made necessary the existence of such an anomalous and inhuman practice, all efforts to stamp it out were bound to fail. But with the passing of the feudal power structure and entry of the industrial age under the British, the compulsions of the medieaval age which helped the existence of Sati were no longer there. Hence the efforts of Raja Rammohan Roy succeeded while those of emperor Akbar could not.

One last reason that needs to be mentioned in this context is that of grief and remorse experienced by a widowed lady. Women as such are more sensitive and emotional than menu This explains in part the readiness of some woman to commit Sati. But it should be borne in mind that the proportion of voluntary Sati was far less and the reasons behind voluntary Sati Though facts were blown out of proportion to justify this practice. However, in conclusion it can be observed that a complexity of factors contributed over different periods to make Sati a prevalent custom.

CHILD-MARRIAGE (Bal Vivaha)

Child-marriage is another ‘blessing’ of the medieaval age and it was born from the same compulsions that ; perpetuated Sati.Child-marriage was not not prevalent in ancient India. The most popular form of marriage was Swayamvara where grooms assembled at the bride’ s house and the bride selected her spouse. Svayam-vara can be translated as self selection of one’ s husband, Svayam = self, Vara = husband. Instances of Swayamvara ceremony are found in our national epics, the Ramayana and Mahabharata. Various types of marraiges wereprevalant in ancient India Gandharva Vivaha (love marriage), Asura Viviha (marriage by abduction) etc., But among these Bal-Viviha is conspicuous its absence.

There are many reasons to believe that this custom originated in the medieval ages. As mentioned earlier in the turbulent atmosphere of the medieavel ages, law and order was not yet a universal phenomenon and arbitrary powers were concentrated in the hands of a hierarchy led by a despotic monarch. In India the Sultans of Delhi who held the place of the despotic monarch, came from a different type of culture. They were orthodox in their beliefs with a fanatical commitment to their religion and a ruthless method in its propagation. Intolerant as they were to all forms of worship other than their own, they also exercised contempt for members of other faiths. (See note at the end of this chapter).

Women as it is are at the receiving and during any war, arson, plunder, etc. During the reign of the Delhi Sultans these were the order of the day and the worst sufferers were Hindu women. During these dark days were spawned customs like child-marriage and selection of women from the rest of the society, wearing of the Ghungat (veil). This age also perpetuated customs like Sati and looking upon the birth of a female baby as an ill omen, even killing newly born baby girls by drowning them in a tub of milk. Amidst the feeling of insecurity, the presence of young unmarried girls was a potential invitation for disaster.

The predatory Sarasenic feudal lords and princelings of Sarasenic origins who stalked all over India in the middle ages were a source of constant threat . Hence parents would seek to get over with the responsibilities of their daughters by getting them married off before they reached the marriage age. The custom of child marriages with the ‘bride’ and ‘groom’ still in their cradles was a culmination of this tendency. This way the danger to a growing girl’s virginity was somewhat reduced.

Many marriages during the middle ages were performed in the cradle itself.
The predatory Sarasenic feudal lords and princelings of Sarasenic origins who stalked all over India in the middle ages were a source of constant threat . Hence parents would seek to get over with the responsibilities of their daughters by getting them married off before they reached the marriage age. The custom of child marriages with the ‘bride’ and ‘groom’ still in their cradles was a culmination of this tendency. This way the danger to a growing girl’s virginity was somewhat reduced.

Alongwith this principal reason, there were a few other reasons arising from the nature of the feudal society which were conducive for the prevalence of this practice. In a feudal society, qualities like rivalry, personal honour, hereditary friendship or enmity are rated very highly. Because of this, military alliances play a very important role in preserving or destroying the balance of power between the various kingdoms and fiefdoms. To ensure that the military alliances entered into were observed by both parties, practices like exchanging Juvenile members of the respective families who were educated and brought up at each other’s palaces were followed.

They were a sort of captives who were held to ensure that the military alliances between the two kingdoms or clans were honoured. But a more lasting bond that could back up military alliances were-matrimonial alliances between members of the two famlies . But such matrimonial alliances could be worked out smoothly only if the bride and groom were ready to accept each others Young men and women of marriageable age are bound to be choosy. This difficulty could be avoided when the marriage was between two children or babies where there was no question of their having any sense of choice as to who their partners in life should be.

The caste hierarchy also perhaps had its role to play in perpetuating such a system. Caste which is based on birth and heredity does not allow marriages between members of different castes . But as youngsters whose emotions and passions could be ruled by other considerations might violate this injunction. Out of the necessity to preserve itself, the hereditary caste system could have helped in nourishing the practice of child-marriage.

Among other subsidiary considerations which could have helped to preserve this custom might be the belief that adults (or adolescent) boys and girls would indulge in loose moral practices. This consideration would have - been more relevant in the context of the puritanical and orthodox environment of the bygone ages. The practice could also have been perpetuated, especially among- the economically weaker sections, by the consideration of keeping marriage expenses to a minimum. A child-marriage need not have been as grand an affair as adult marriages.

Note on Sati and Child-marriage

Sati, Child-marriage, Ghunghat, etc were largely caused by the arbitrary tryannical rule of the Sultans of Delhi. The temperament of theseSultans was a result of socio-cultural reasons. They had imbibed these their tryannical traits alongwith their religion from the Arabs who display traits like fanaticism and short-temperedness in their extreme. The reasons why these traits should exist among those Arabs who originate from the Saudi Arabian Peninsula are to be found in their harsh natural environment.

Saudi Arabia, the birth-place of Islam is devoid of fertile plains and river valleys which are congenial to the development of a settled civilized life. This was responsible for the atrophy of residents of the Arabian peninsula into barbarism, and their exclusion from civilization. The same cannot be said of the people of Mesopotamia, Assyria and Egypt who today consider themselves to be Arabs but were the founders of great riparian civilizations of the ancient world. The absence of a civilized way of life among the Arabs (from the Arabian peninsula) nourished the fanatical attitude which later became a characteristic of Islamic thought and way of life.

This attitude was transmitted to other people who were converted to Islam. Added to this was Islam’s monotheistic character because of which Mohammedans regarded all other religions in exclusion from their own. This singularistic and exclusive character of monotheistic Islam precluded any possibility of assimilation into itself of other deities or forms of worship. And whenever it had the support or the force of arms, its fanatical and intolerant nature found brutal expression in the annihilative repression it unleashed whenever it came in contact with another religion or culture.

Such was the cultural lineage of the Sultans of Delhi. It made itself evident in the forcible conversion of peoples of other faiths to Islam at the point of the sword, destruction of places of worship belonging to other faiths, the imposition of Jazia tax on non-muslims and other policies whose objective was to stamp out all other religions and to Islamize the country.

_____________________________________________________________

Now we move on to examine Hindu Religious Practices like Yagna, and Dana and Gotra

https://hinduismexposed.wordpress.com/women-in-hinduism/
Women In Hinduism
WOMEN IN HINDUISM

Inequity and degradation of women are sanctified in the Hindu religion. Manu Smriti says:
Never trust a woman. Never sit alone with a woman even if it may be your mother, she may tempt you. Do not sit alone with your daughter, she may tempt you. Do not sit alone with your sister, she may tempt you.

Again the same Manu Smriti continues:

“Na stree swadantriya marhathi”. “No liberty for women in society”.

Now, that is most disgusting!!! This sick pervert actually insinuates that one’s own mother will tempt him! Na’oothu billahi minash-shaytaanir-rajeem!!!

Now see the verses of “Sacred” Hinduism Literature about women

Women = Dogs = Sudras = Untruth

“And whilst not coming into contact with Sûdras and remains of food; for this Gharma is he that shines yonder, and he is excellence, truth, and light; but woman, the Sûdra, the dog, and the black bird (the crow), are untruth: he should not look at these, lest he should mingle excellence and sin, light and darkness, truth and untruth.”

(Satapatha Brahmana 14:1:1:31)

Women are dumb !

“Indra himself hath said, The mind of woman brooks not discipline, her intellect hath little weight.”

(Rig Veda 8:33:17)

Women r powerless n have no inheritence !

“they could not discern the world of heaven, they saw this (cup) for the wives, they drew it; then indeed did they discern the world of heaven; in that (the cup) for the wives is drawn, (it serves) to reveal the world of heaven. Soma could not bear being drawn for women; making the ghee a bolt they beat it, they drew it when it had lost its power; therefore women are powerless, have no inheritance, and speak more humbly than even a bad man”

(Yajur Veda – Taittiriya Samhita 6:5:8:2)

A wife without a son is a discarded wife !

“And on the following day he goes to the house of a discarded (wife), and prepares a pap for Nirriti;–a discarded wife is one who has no son. He cooks the pap for Nirriti of black rice, after splitting the grains with his nails. He offers it with, ‘This, O Nirriti, is thy share: accept it graciously, hail!’ For a wife that is without a son, is possessed with Nirriti (destruction, calamity)“

(Satapatha Brahmana 5:3:1:13)

Women = Idiots = Animals = Untrustworthy

“At the time of consultation he should have removed idiots, the mute, blind, or deaf; animals and very old people; women, barbarians, and those who are ill or who lack a part of the body.”

“(Such) despicable (persons), likewise animals and especially women betray secret council; therefore he should be cautious among them.”

(Manusmrti 7:149-150)

Women r not fit for independence !

“Men must keep their women dependent day and night, and keep under their own control those who are attached to sensory objects. Her father guards her in childhood, her husband guards her in youth, and her sons guard her in old age. A woman is never fit for independence.”

(Manusmrti 9:2-4)

All women think like whores !

“Women donot care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age (thinking)“It is enough he is a man.” They give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly.”

“Through their passion for men, through their mutable temper, through their natural heartlessness, they become disloyal to their husbands, however they may be carefully guarded over this.”

(Manusmrti 9:14-15)

HINDU WOMEN VS MUSLIM WOMEN

The Brahmin media made a big campaign recently out of the Shah Banu case and they blew it out of all proportion. They implied that Islam restricted 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.

HINDU WOMAN

The Hindu woman has no right to divorce her husband.
She has no property or inheritance rights.
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.
The family of the girl has to offer an enormous dowry to the bridegroom/family.
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).
She can never remarry.
The widow is considered to be a curse and must not be seen in public. She cannot wear jewelry or colorful clothes. (She should not even take part in her children’s marriage!)
Child and infant marriage is encouraged.
THE MUSLIM LADY

The Muslim lady has the same right as the Muslim man in all matters, including divorce.
She enjoys property and inheritance rights. (Which other religion grants women these rights?). She can also conduct her own separate business.
She can marry any Muslim of her choice. If her parents choose a partner for her, her consent has to be taken.
The dowry in Islam is a gift from a husband to his wife (not the other way round as is practiced by some ignoramuses).
A Muslim widow is encouraged to remarry, and her remarriage is the responsibility of the Muslim society.
Mixed marriage is encouraged and is a means to prevent racism creeping into society.
A Muslim mother is given the highest form of respect.
To learn more about Muslim ladies, visit the Banaa-tun-Noor web site.

The living revolutionary Mr. Rajashekar questions what right has the Hindus to criticize the Muslims? Have you ever heard of a Muslim burning his wife? Every day we read in the paper about 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 Brahmin press has brainwashed all of us saying that Muslims do not give freedom to their women. He again questions, “Do the Hindus respect their women?” You be the judge!

“SATI” – HINDU WIDOW BURNING!

If the Hindu man’s wife dies, he is free to go and find another beautiful woman when he wants. But if the Hindu woman’s husband dies, not only is she prohibited to remarry but she should be cremated along with her dead husband (“Sati”). According to the Haria, the woman who follows her husband in death purifies three families – her father’s, her mother’s and her husband’s. These Brahmin theologians propagate the theory based in the Vedas that a woman who did not burn herself would never become free of being born as a woman again. If a woman’s husband was guilty of the murder of a Brahmin or guilty of “ingratitude” – then the wife who died clasping his body was said to purify him of his sins.

When His “Holiness” Puri Shankaracharya was asked about the fate of the widow’s children, he replied – “it is fate! Let the children suffer or die without a mother. But SATI has to be performed according to Hinduism”.

“SATI MATA Kl JAI”

The Times of India reported (14-9-87): Jaipur- In what appeared to be a revival of a centuries-old custom of “Sati”, a young woman belonging to a warrior caste of Rajasthan climbed into the funeral pyre of her husband, police said yesterday. Eighteen-year old Roop Kanwar’s husband, Mansingh, had died in a hospital in Kikar district on Friday, His body was later taken to his home village at Diwrala for cremation. Roop Kanwar sat on the funeral pyre while it was lit by one of Mansingh ‘ s relatives. Hundreds of villagers who knew of her “Sati” well in advance gathered at the spot shouting slogans in praise of the burning widow. Police, who claimed to have received the information late, registered a case against four close relatives of Mansingh for having “HELPED” Roop Kanwar commit “Sati”.

Roop Kanwar’s husband, Mansingh took more than Rs. 100,000 worth of dowry in the form of money, 25 tola of gold, a TV, a radio and a refrigerator. Though Mansingh had demanded dowry worth of 200,000 rupees, her father had success- fully negotiated and reduced the amount to Rs. 100,000/=. So far in the same village more than 23 dowry killings have occurred in the last 3 years as recompense for not bringing the promised dowry in time.

The paper continues that the most revealing statement came from Mr. Cheeta Singh, a village teacher who said:

“After all, she had no life to took forward to. As a widow, remarriage was out of the question in the Hindu tradition bound community”.

The teacher continues:

“The society treats a widow as a “kulachani” (an evil omen) and a economic liability. She has to remain barefoot, sleep on the floor and is not allowed to venture out of the house. She is slandered if seen talking to any male. It was better that she died, than live such a life,” he said.

COMPULSORY “SATI”

A report from REUTER (25-9-87): said that Roop Kanwar was forced onto the funeral pyre against her will and struggled to save her life. Some villagers alleged that Roop Kanwar was forced onto the pyre and that she cried piteously as she died. A police report established conclusively on 4-10-87 that Roop Kanwar did try to escape from the pyre before it was lit. But she was unable to do so as logs of wood were stacked up to her neck. Her screams, which the villagers insist was the recital of “Gayatri mantra,” were drowned in the slogans of “Sati mata kijai” (long live the lady of “Sati”). Although neighbours claimed that she was 18, the Times of India quoted school records as showing her date of birth as August 15th 1971.

A survey by a Calcutta Women’s Association reveals that most of the “Sati” are conducted because of the compulsion of the dead Hindu husbands close relatives, irrespective of the young widow’s protests to commit suicide. Though the Indian Law prohibits such a cruel act, never in Indian history have any of the dead Hindu husband’s close relatives been punished for forcing such crimes.

Had Roop Kunwar died in an accident instead of her husband, Mansingh would have sat as the groom in yet one more marriage ceremony with another beautiful girl. He would also pick up one more dowry worth 100,000 rupees and as a result Mansingh’s parents would have gained another colourful income.

THE FATHER’S REACTION

Knowing that Kanwar’s father would not allow such a cruel murder, Mansingh’s parents had not even informed her father, he came to know of the incidents only through newspaper reports the next day.

Roop Kanwar’s father has lost his beautiful, young and only daughter in a cruel forceful murder in the name of Hinduism. Look at the atrocities to the Hindu women. BEING A HINDU WOMAN IS A CURSE.

DR. LAKSHMFS ADVICE TO BRAHMIN WOMEN

Dr. Lakshmi, a well known gynecologist and social worker from Delhi, and who herself is a Brahmin (and married to the age of 37), suggests that Brahmin women should come out of their shells and act their own since she claims that their corroded thoughts won’t save them at all.

Dr. Lakshmi again claims that most of the women who get married after 25 are not virgins. (Most Brahmin women do not get married until they are 30. For this long delay the Brahmin male is responsible for finally getting a SECOND HAND SPOUSE. She challenges that abstention from sexual activity is against the nature of the human physical body. She also says that it is the responsibility of the society to get them married quickly as in other religions.

She says that if you are a Hindu woman you cannot love anyone you like and you cannot marry anyone whom you choose. Your birth sign (stars) should match your mate’s birth sign. In addition you should meet the unbearable dowry demand.

From the Skanda Purana

The Goddess then entered the palace of the god who bears the moon as his diadem. When the three eyed god saw her he said, “Damn ‘women,” and she bowed to him and said, “You have spoken truly, and not falsely. This portion of Nature is senseless; women deserve to be reviled. It is the grace of men which brings release from the ocean of existence”. Then Hara rejoiced and said to her, “Now you are worthy, and I will give you a son who will bring renown to you who are fair and glorious”. Hara, the abode of various wonders, then made love with the Goddess.

Popularly known as Babasaheb, Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar was born on 14 April 1891 in Mhow, a military cantonment town of the then Central Province of India. His father, Ramji Maloji Sakpal was a Subedar in army and his mother Bhimabai Sakpal was a house wife.

Babasaheb belonged to a so-called lower caste Mahar who were treated as untouchables; he had faced and seen several types of social discriminations since childhood. But his father being an army officer was able to arrange good education for his children despite several resistances from the society.

Ambedkar was treated as untouchable in the school along with other dalit children; they were not allowed to sit with other so-called higher caste children, neither were they allowed to drink water from common water vessel.

Ambedkar was very meritorious in studies and after completing his early education in Bombay moved to United States for post-graduation and research; did his post-graduation and Phd from Columbia University, New York City. He further studied at London School of Economics and completed masters and doctorate from there as well.

Work and Social Reforms:

Thus, Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar, in spite of several odds got the best of education from very good institutions of the world because of his talent and merit only. He also received a degree in Law.

His major contribution in eradicating social evils was fighting for the rights of the untouchables and so-called lower caste people. At the time of preparation of the Government of India Act, 1919, he advocated for the separate electorates for untouchables and other lower caste people. He demanded reservation for such communities.
Ambedkar started several publications such as Mook Nayak, a weekly; Bahiskrit Bharat, a periodical to create awareness and to fight for the rights of untouchables and lower-castes.
He founded Bahishkrit Hitakarni Sabha on 20 July 1924 at Bombay with the objective of creating socio-political awareness among untouchables and also for making Government sensitive towards their issues; he called upon the dalits and untouchables to “Educate, Agitate and Organize” for their rightful place in the society.
He started to launch public movements against discriminations faced by untouchables such as opening the public water resources for untouchables, burning of Manusmriti, an ancient Hindu text which gives sanction to caste-system and for the rights of lower caste people to enter into Hindu temples.
In 1932, after the Third Round Table Conference in Britain in which Dr Ambedkar participated, the British announced the infamous Communal Award according to which there was a provision of separate electorate in British India for different communities; thus, Untouchables were also considered as a separate electorate; it meant that for the election to the seats reserved for the untouchables only persons who could vote were untouchables. The scheme was vehemently opposed by Gandhiji and other Congress leaders as being communal and divisive in nature which would divide Hindus into two separate groups. But Dr Ambedkar was in its favour as he was of the view that by having separate electorate more and more number of legislatures of ‘Depressed Class’ would be elected.
After long and tedious discussions between Ambedkar and Congress leaders, Poona Pact was reached on 25 September 1932 according to which the system of separate electorate was abolished but reservation of seats for Depressed Class remained the same; hence, now untouchables would not be separate from Hindus but seats would be reserved for them. It was a major step in recognizing the political rights of untouchables within the fold of Hindu society.
On similar lines, the Constitution of India in 1950 gave benefits of reservation to Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes who were earlier referred to as ‘Depressed Classes’.
Dr Amedkar’s biggest contribution in the making of modern India was his momentous effort as the Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee; the most important feature of the Constitution of India is its special focus on socio-political and economic justice and equality; he forcefully advocated for the rights of women and SCs, STs and OBCs; special provisions were added for their upliftment and for eradicating various discriminations faced by them.
Later in his life, Dr Ambedkar converted to Buddhism after getting fed-up with caste system, superstitions, rituals and discriminatory practices of Hinduism.
Therefore, all through his life, socially as well as politically, Babasaheb kept fighting against prevailing social evils of our country; his contribution towards making the downtrodden people acquire self-respect and their rightful place is immeasurable.

He was truly one of the greatest personalities to be born in India; Babasaheb died on 6 December 1956 in Delhi after prolonged illness due to diabetes.

Baba Amte

https://youtu.be/4GLnBL5CPz8

Though it was clearly proved in the Supreme Court that the EVMs could be tampered, the ex CJI Sathasivam committed a grave error of judgement that the EVMs could be replaced in Phased manner on the suggestion of the ex CEC Sampath because of the cost of Rs 1600 crore. The very fact that the EVMs has to be replaced it itself a proof that the EVMsare tamperable.The ex CJI did not order for using paper ballots till the entire EVMs were replaced. In 2014 Lok Sabha elections only in 8 seats the EVMs were replaced. In the recent Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections only in 20 seats the EVMs were replaced. The EC and the Murderer of democratic institutions (Modi) are not in a mood to replace the EVMs because the cost shot up to Rs 5000 crore and above and because of the advantage it has for winning elections for BJP (Brashtachar Jiyadha Pdychopaths)
As we have a judiciary as powerful as the executive, it must dissolve the Central and State governments selected by these fraud EVMs and go for fresh polls with paper ballots as followed in 80 democracies of the world.
In our country after Ms Mayawati, the four times Chief Minister and the Supremo of BSP raised the issue of EVMs the whole country and the world has become alert.
As the PRESSTITUTE media conducts survey and opinion polls in support of BJP, the cadres of BSP spread all over the country can go to the booth level voters to seek their votes in a list system of voting in paper ballots. The it will be proved that the BJP will not get even 1% votes for ever.

comments (0)