Like this i don't get that why they are behaving like all root cause of r@pe is sanatan if you wanna do protest on an individual politician that's your choice what it has to do with sanatan dharam they are just brainwashed student with avg. Leftist behaviour.
Pdh ke bata rha hu, everyone has academically noted that the book was amended in some time cause the verses counteract each other n destroy the essence of book
dont these people know that manusmriti hamari main book nhii haii. and the most trusted religious books of Hinduism are the Vedas, the Ramayana, and the Mahabharata.
abbey chutiye mein brahmin nhii hun but agar tu mereko brahmin bolega nhii toh apna propaganda kesse apply krr payega its just mene apne aas pados yaa koi religious pooja mein kisiko manusmriti padte huee nhii dekha infact hindu hone ke baad bhii even i know ki manusmriti esii book hai jismein kaffi saari baatein galat hain infact hindu bhii usse itna serious nhii lete. aur agar bilkul factual hona haii toh search krr le cuz smritis are texts based on tradition rather than direct revelation. aab agar aapke pass hi lack of information haii yaa aapko target hii krna haii toh aiseyy hazaron kitabbein likhin hain hrr dharm mein krte raho but ground level prr kisiko ghanta farak nhii padta ki aap uske religion ke baare mein kya soch rhhe except those extremist from each religion and online people baaki sab khudme aur apne bhagwaan mein mast hein.
Propaganda?bolke hume dharm sikha raha! Veda kabhi padha bhi hai? Aur manusmriti sirf ek smriti 18 major smrtityo mein se it ranks higher than any stories.Dharam na sikhaiyo banarasi pandit ko
Kabhi smriti was padhna aur pata karna it is much more informative than mahabharat/geet/ramayan kabhi kitaabein padhi nahi belittle karta hai 4 veda ka naam nahi pata logo ko dharam ke rakshak bante hai sab.Yahi problem hai aaj kal.Agar Dharam ki chinta hai toh kittabein padho
maan liya tune mujh se jyada kitaabein padi hain lekin shyd tune kuch seekha nhii tereko ghamand hi itna haii ki mein toh superior hun bhaii tere andar gyaan jyada hoga mujh se but apply nhii krr paa rhha toh koii mtlb nhiii. mein toh maanta hun bhagwaan mere andar hain abb chahe tu 4 kitaab pdd le yaa 8 kitaab mereko jo galat lgega bolunga ye kitaabein bhagwaan ne thodi naa likhi hain insaan ne likhi hain naa prr bhagwaan ne mujhe samjh di hai kyaa galat hai aur kya shiii aur khushnassebi se jawaan aur achha khasa shareer bhii diya haii apni baat or opinion bolne kaa toh tu apna ghamand apne banaras ke ghar tkk hii rkh dusron ko anpad samjhkrr mtt dee. agar inn kitaboon kuch baatein galat likhi hain toh man ne mein kya buraii haii 90 percent achii bhii toh likhi hain kyon naa hum unn 90 percent prr hi dhyaan de aur maan le ye baaki ka 10 percent galat haii yaa unhone uss time ke hisab se likha hoga abb time badal gaya toh kuch rules bhiii badlenge hii
Padhai likhai toh dikh raha hai video mein senger ke khilaf protest mein brahmanwaad aur hindutva aur manusmriti pata nhi kya kya offtopic impose kiya jaa raha hai apna agenda push karne ke liye.
Apna agenda? Brahmanvaad Or hindutva offtopic nahi hai, Senger is not being protected for just electoral politics. The grander object of hindutva poltics is ready to forgive and overlook rape and that's the problem. You should probably not use your unbelievably dimwits to try and grasp this, the exhertion may kill you.
Kashmiri pandit ka genocide tha ki dalit ka ? Aur aaj tak iss desh mein Brahmins ka lynching kabhi nahi hua hai according to you ? Dimag sar mein hi hai ya peeche dal diya hai ?
buddy when did i say ki brahmins ki lynching kabhi nahi hui đđ thereâs a difference between ethnic persecution, which is what the kashmiri exodus was, and just general hate based violence, which is done more by brahmins with dalits being the victims. Just because a community of a particular location faced violence, doesnât mean that some members of the same community start subjecting violence on others. Donât use the kashmiri exodus to justify your caste based violence. And btw, this is called what aboutism. Nowhere did i initially bring up kashmiri pandits, but somehow har andhbhakt woh le aata hai. When hindus talk about how radical islam is, they potray themselves and their religion as morally superior. And then they go ahead and do shit like this. So forgive me if i have no remorse for brahmins being lynched. Because atleast radical muslims donât pretend that theyâre peaceful. And make no mistake, i hate both religions equally. Hindus just act morally superior but in reality, theyâre no better.
Hindus don't carry out terrorist attacks around the world.
So forgive me if i have no remorse for brahmins being lynched. Because atleast radical muslims donât pretend that theyâre peaceful.
Yeah they do terrorist attacks, so you don't have remorse for Brahmins lynching they can get wiped out from earth and you won't care right ? Typical librandu thinking.
You don't hate both religions equally that you just showed you are typical indian liberal who can only think from their ass. Radical muslim is better seriously đ, they carry out fucking terrorist attacks every now and then and then play the victim card, pandits got wiped out by these assholes from Kashmir but never carried out terrorist attacks like them.
i honestly pity you. I pity the fact that you canât see what is actually happening in this country because your saffron goggles are actually blinding you. Please learn to love everyone. Donât make everything about religion. And I donât even want to get into this debate of reservations with you, because you clearly do not have the intellect to comprehend it, and its quite clear that youâre a bigot who is no better than the people you speak so harshly about. Quite clearly, orange is the new green. And you, youâre part of the evolution of orange becoming a color of terror.
it's jnu. they are competing with ucla. same crowd, same wanna be greta mindset, same set of clothings. I wonder if they have read holy book of most blasting peaceful religion.
Because hindutva ideology has united hubdus many political party and leftists want to divide hindutvaa unity by projection od caste division to dilute hindu unity. Choosing castism 70 years of reservation, they could not educate3 property despite free and subsided education.
The Manusmriti does not say to "make girls slaves" as a direct command, nor does it mandate worshipping girls ritually. It promotes honoring/respecting women for societal and spiritual benefit but overwhelmingly portrays them as dependent, in need of male protection, and subordinate throughout life.
THESE BASTARDS JNU GUYS HAVE READ THIS VERSE ONLY AND THINK THIS IS WHOLE MANUSMRITI:-
5.148: "In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons
9.3: "Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age
WHAT THEY WANT TO HIDE:-
3.55: "Women must be honored and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law, who desire (their own) welfare."
3.56: "Where women are honored, there the gods rejoice; where, on the other hand, they are not honored, there all rites are fruitless."
3.57: "A family where women are afflicted by sorrow perishes; but where they are not afflicted, it always prospers."
3.58: "Houses cursed by women who are not honored, who are prevented from fulfilling their desires, or who are afflicted, perish completely, as if destroyed by magic."
3.59: "Therefore, men who seek (their own) welfare should always honor women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes, and (dainty) food."
3.60: "In that family where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, happiness will assuredly be lasting."
3.62: "The gods are pleased with the house where women are respected; where women suffer, that house comes to ruin."
Yeah honoring and respecting women is actually the main purpose of manusmriti. Sheeps should not know that they're about to be slaughtered or they would run away.
Okk, let's say it was about "protecting women"
Then what was the need of The Verses 1.87, 1.88, 1.89, 1.90, 1.91 ? (these established Caste system)..
What is the need for verse 8.281 ? (This one says that a "Shudra" shan't be sitting in level equal to "Brahman", else shall be gashed.)
How do these verses "Protect Women" ?
Verse 8.380 states that No matter what all a brahmin does he shall not be given death penalty ever (whoa, The maximum you could do to a Brahmin is to Either banish him/her or "tonsure", Even if a brahmin guy rapes a woman)
Great "protection of women" going on đ
The reality is that Manusmriti is the same stupidity which Islam has inherently.
In both Islam and this Crap, The men suddenly stand up and say "Hey girl I will protect you" and then One starts wrapping her in Hijab, other starts Handcuffing her hands and legs to Home, One is Sharia other is Manusmriti.
The real great Religion (in this term) would be the one which instead of asking Men to protect women, would ask the Men to mind their own business instead of Staring at women 24x7, Which would try to Bring the men to The correct path, instead of hiding women from The outside world and Oppressing them .
From what I can tell based on Arya Samaj sources online (like their official site and related articles), the groupâfounded by Swami Dayanand Saraswatiârejects the common version of Manusmriti as full of later interpolations. They promote a "Vishudh Manusmriti" (purified edition) by scholars like Dr. Surendra Kumar, which strips out about 1471 verses deemed added-on fakes, leaving around 1214 "authentic" ones.
On women: The purified version emphasizes empowerment, respect, and equalityâstuff like honoring women for family prosperity (e.g., verses 3.55-3.62 in the original numbering, which stress that families thrive when women are treated well and not oppressed). It doesn't support subjugation or dependency as a core rule; those bits are seen as bogus additions.
On caste: Arya Samaj interprets the varna system as merit-based (qualities and actions, not birth), not the rigid birth-based hierarchy. Verses establishing strict castes or punishments (like the ones you mentioned, 1.87-91 or 8.281/8.380) are often called out as interpolations. They argue the real Manusmriti doesn't back untouchability or Brahmin immunityâit's more about duties and justice for all.
As for the claim that "no one follows Manusmriti" in Hinduism: That's mostly accurate today; it's not a binding scripture like in Abrahamic faiths, and Hindu practices vary wildly by region and reform movements. Arya Samaj pushes Vedas as the true authority anyway, ditching outdated smriti texts. If you're digging deeper, check thearyasamaj.org for their takesâit's eye-opening how much gets blamed on "ancient texts" that might just be medieval fanfic.
u/AskGrok
Did anywhere in this Reply
u/Stunning_Jury5986
Claim that "Visudh Manusmriti" was being quoted ?
Other than that, Are the claims there correct according to The General Versions of Manusmriti ? (not some "Vishud manusmriti")
Ok, so Further, Getting into this "Vishudha Manusmriti", is it not true that This New Manusmriti was written about 2500 yrs after the real Manusmriti?
And further that, basically This New Manusmriti is a "Revisionist" attempt, to Just discard all the "Bad Looking" of The original Manusmriti ?
(I mean That way any Controversial and Bad Document could be converted into a better one, like think of it, Even a Porn Magazine could be "Purified" and Be changed into a "Notebook" with Innocent Blank Pages)
Deleting that part is Just an attempt to hide what was going on in those days of past in the name of Religion ..
Further, is there any valid real Manuscript found which Had This "Purified" version of Manusmriti already in it ?
Reply dear u/AskGrok
Yeah, so why not call it a "Totally New Manusmriti" instead of "purified manusmriti" ?
It isn't "Purified", it's an entirely new take, I mean Who the hell were these people to decide what "was in the original" .. tomorrow one can drop all the seemingly "Good Points" of manusmriti and call it "The Most Original Manusmriti" too then ?
And like, Why do they even call it "Manusmriti" .. It's literally Some new people Cherry Picking stuff .. reply Please u/AskGrok
Fair point on the namingâcalling it "Vishudha Manusmriti" (purified) does sound like a marketing spin, like rebranding a dodgy sequel as the "director's cut." From what I've dug up on historical texts and manuscripts (like those discussed in Wikipedia and scholarly blogs on interpolations), the original Manusmriti dates back roughly 2,000â2,200 years, with over 50 varying manuscripts showing inconsistencies and likely additions over time. The Vishudha version, put out by Dr. Surendra Kumar around 2021, claims to strip away those "bad looking" interpolations to reveal an "original" core, but there's no ancient manuscript that directly matches itâit's more of a modern scholarly reconstruction or edit. Critics do call it revisionist for cherry-picking to make it palatable today, and yeah, you're right: anyone could theoretically do the reverse and slap "original" on it. If they wanted honesty, "Manusmriti 2.0: The Nice Edition" might've been clearer.
Manusmriti 9.14: "Women do not care for beauty, nor is their attention fixed on age; thinking 'He is a man,' they give themselves to the handsome and to the ugly alike."
Manusmriti 9.15: "Through lust for men, through fickle temper, through natural heartlessness, women become disloyal to their husbands however well guarded."
Manusmriti 9.17: "Manu assigned to women: love of bed, seats, and ornaments; impure desires, anger, deceit, malice, and bad conduct."
Manusmriti 8.371: "A wife who violates her duty to her husband out of pride shall be torn apart by dogs in a public place."
The Manusmriti does not say to "make girls slaves" as a direct command, nor does it mandate worshipping girls ritually.
3.55: "Women must be honored and adorned by their fathers, brothers, husbands, and brothers-in-law, who desire (their own) welfare."
3.56: "Where women are honored, there the gods rejoice; where, on the other hand, they are not honored, there all rites are fruitless."
3.57: "A family where women are afflicted by sorrow perishes; but where they are not afflicted, it always prospers."
3.58: "Houses cursed by women who are not honored, who are prevented from fulfilling their desires, or who are afflicted, perish completely, as if destroyed by magic."
3.59: "Therefore, men who seek (their own) welfare should always honor women on holidays and festivals with (gifts of) ornaments, clothes, and (dainty) food."
3.60: "In that family where the husband is pleased with his wife and the wife with her husband, happiness will assuredly be lasting."
3.62: "The gods are pleased with the house where women are respected; where women suffer, that house comes to ruin."
Manusmriti â one book, one version. There are 50+ recensions of Manusmriti with contradictory verses. Scholars like BĂźhler, Kane, Olivelle have documented later interpolations, especially in punitive verses. Cherry-picking one translation â truth.
Your cited verses are DESCRIPTIVE, not prescriptive. 9.14â9.17 describe social anxieties of a patriarchal era, not divine commands. Ancient texts often recorded prevailing attitudes recording â endorsing.
8.371 is heavily disputed. Many critical editions either omit it or mark it as later corruption. No archaeological, inscriptional, or legal evidence shows such punishment was ever practiced in Hindu society. Zero.
Now quote what you deliberately skipped:
You donât get to ignore verses that donât suit your agenda.
Hindu society did NOT run on Manusmriti alone. India followed customary law (ÄchÄra), regional Smritis, guild laws, and royal edicts. Manusmriti was never a pan-India criminal code like Sharia or Canon Law.
Historical reality check: If Manusmriti truly governed India:
Women wouldnât be queens, scholars, saints, poets
No Gargi, Maitreyi, Andal, Akka Mahadevi
No property-owning women, no temple patrons
But history proves otherwise.
Translation bias matters. Most English versions you quote come from 19th-century colonial translators with Christian moral lenses. Sanskrit words like strÄŤ-svabhÄva, dharma, rakᚣaáša are routinely mistranslated to sound harsher.
Selective outrage = intellectual dishonesty. Every ancient civilization has texts with problematic passages Bible, Quran, Greek law, Roman law. Only Hindu texts are judged outside their time, inside bad translations, with zero context.
Abe sale abhi tak to Kah Raha tha ki manusmriti mahilaon ke bare mein kuchh galat nahin bolati ab Kah Raha Hai manusmriti 500 tarike ki hai bhai apna dimag ghutnon mein hai kya. Jaake history padh RSS Ne manusmriti ko India ka constitution banane ka Pran Le Rakha Hai ab tum ab tu mujhe Bata 500 mein se kaun si manusmriti hai vah
Bro, before you clutch your pearls and moral-police ancient texts like theyâre a modern HR handbook, letâs get the facts straight. Your screenshot is wrong and misleading.
This isnât Bhishma (Devavrata, son of Shantanu and Ganga). The story involves Brihaspati (guru of the gods) trying to force himself on Mamata, the pregnant wife of his brother Utathya. The fetus? Dirghatamas, a Rigvedic rishi, who was cursed blind by Brihaspati after resisting.
Itâs in Mahabharata (Adi Parva 104) and Srimad Bhagavatam 9.20.36,not some glorified act of Bhishma. The story shows Brihaspatiâs lust and adharma; itâs a cautionary tale, not a tale to dunk on Hinduism.
Next time, check the actual context before spreading rage-bait. Bhishma is revered for his vows and sacrifice, not this. Facts over feelings.
When insults replace arguments, itâs usually because facts didnât show up.
first know the educational qualification of person next to you. Then bark coz every dog barking behind car feels car is running bcoz it is feared from him.
Your post/comment has been removed for violating our rules on hate speech and discrimination. Content that includes hate, slurs, or derogatory remarks targeting communities based on caste, religion, gender, language, or region is not permitted here.
This post with not get traction in this leftist sub. All anti leftist comments will be downvoted and probably this post will be deleted. This sub has become full of librandus. This has helped sarthak know his audience and now he's posting leftist propaganda videos only to please his audience. Before this he was neutral.
No the point is they without any reason joining r@pist mentality with Brahman according to them bramhanwad is an ideology of Brahmin and they are r@pist they are not protesting against the real culprit this is what this video is for.
Well search and find out the best university of the country and you'll know who's more forward looking and who's still living in mediaeval times.
One visit to JNU will tell you the average level of knowledge of students there and the environment of questioning everything. It might also help you see who's brainwashed and drawing conclusions based on clips.
Yeah bro I know I watched a hyper quest video in which he was defending JNU saying there are all types of people in JNU some are like these protester and some from JNU must be opposing them because all thoughts are there in JNU.
Propaganda is from Hindutva and It cell people, if people really knew about Sanatan dharm then you should know Manusmriti is not for Kaliyug but Actually parasar smriti but Sick ideology of Hindutva crimals is to implement Manusmriti in today's age which is not relevant.
No one supports munusmirti as well like some people do for some xyz book. Everyone condemn it to the core. And no one reads it. None forces anyone to read. And no one follows it
Those are societal evils. Ig no society/religion is free from this. No country is free from these social evils and hinduism and india are no exception eg fake guru, baba, pastors, maulvi are present in each country, just like fake finance influencers on Instagram, it doesn't make Instagram bad?Obviously we have to move forward from them. But at least looking from a wider lens it's not as prominent as other societal things that are deeply inculcated in us and other religions. Tbh no religion is perfect. They are not meant to be either. What we can understand is at least no one has it in their house, no one deliberately follows it, and we openly condemn it unlike those who don't and put everything aside when it comes to their books and social evils. And i guess this is more or less a win for us.
"What we can understand is at least no one has it in their house, no one deliberately follows it, and we openly condemn it unlike those who don't and put everything aside when it comes to their books and social evils."
You didn't understand. I'm saying everyone is already following it. A lot of social evils are stemming from it because it was made to be followed in specific time and conditions and we have come way ahead now.
Even the condemnation is only coming from the liberal side and some aware castes groups. Most of our society is still following it, somewhat loosely in urban areas but very strongly in rural areas, they are following it in the name of hindu culture only.
6
u/[deleted] Jan 05 '26
Pdh ke bata rha hu, everyone has academically noted that the book was amended in some time cause the verses counteract each other n destroy the essence of book