hinduism vs hindutva

[CanadianMalodu]

2 hours ago, lollilolli2020 said:

antha mata annav endii brother; mana emblem is from sarnath ashoka pillar kada. 

That's what we were told. There is no mention of the name Ashoka in Indian literary works . Most of the Mauryan empire description was from Greek translations which too never had the name of Ashoka. The use of Ashoka was primarily from Indianologists from British Era. 

Try coming up one Indian source or literary  work that's not British, that states the name Ashoka. 

Driving so can't write more eloquently but will quote more sources later.

 

 

 

[dasari4kntr]

2 hours ago, CanadianMalodu said:

And you are a dumb believer for not even trying to dig evidence. Try coming up with evidence for Ashoka.

 

చాల్ చాల్లే ఈ conspiracy theories…mundu nee proofs vesi maataladu… there are archeological evidences and literature evidences…and who ever wrote about him..those historians are indians during 1960s era…

ఈ లెక్కన… కౌటిల్యుడు…కౌటిల్యిని అర్దశాస్త్రం..బింబిసారుడు…గౌతమ బుద్దడు…జైన మహావీరుడు…ఇలా చాలా మందే  లేరంటావ్…నీ hindutva ఎజెండాకి ఏది అనుకూలంగా ఉండరో వాళ్ళంతా చరిత్ర లో  లేరా…? 

[dasari4kntr]

2 hours ago, CanadianMalodu said:

That's what we were told. There is no mention of the name Ashoka in Indian literary works . Most of the Mauryan empire description was from Greek translations which too never had the name of Ashoka. The use of Ashoka was primarily from Indianologists from British Era. 

Try coming up one Indian source or literary  work that's not British, that states the name Ashoka. 

Driving so can't write more eloquently but will quote more sources later.

 

 

 

yes ప్రపంచానికి తెలియని విషయం నీకు తెలుసు…post proofs…

[CanadianMalodu]

8 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

yes ప్రపంచానికి తెలియని విషయం నీకు తెలుసు…post proofs…

Naa okkadikr telusu Ani Nenu cheppaledhu. Sources istha Kani, tell me what do you consider or accept as a proof?

[dasari4kntr]

Just now, CanadianMalodu said:

Naa okkadikr telusu Ani Nenu cheppaledhu. Sources istha Kani, tell me what do you consider or accept as a proof?

lol…

firstu nuvvu nee source eyyi saami…

i will read it up…

[dasari4kntr]

2 minutes ago, CanadianMalodu said:

Naa okkadikr telusu Ani Nenu cheppaledhu. Sources istha Kani, tell me what do you consider or accept as a proof?

sare idi cheppu…కౌటిల్యుడు…కౌటిల్యిని అర్దశాస్త్రం nijama abaddama…?

 

[CanadianMalodu]

18 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

lol…

firstu nuvvu nee source eyyi saami…

i will read it up…

Driving lo unna. Crossing border. Will write up a detailed post with all the sources. 

[dasari4kntr]

4 hours ago, CanadianMalodu said:

Driving lo unna. Crossing border. Will write up a detailed post with all the sources. 

ok...i am going to bed...

nee longest essay with sources post cheyyi...repu chadvutaa...

eagerly waiting...

[JerseyBidda]

On 7/3/2024 at 9:00 PM, dasari4kntr said:

Hinduism teaches... సర్వేజనా సుఖినోభవన్తు. లోకాసమస్తా సుఖినోభవంతు

Hindutva teaches.... "hindus in hindhu rastra"

 

read between the lines..which quote attracts you...that is you... 

hinduism is about talking different schools of philosophies of divinity, identity, ego, nyaya, వేద, ఉపనిషద్, life after death..etc

hindutva is about talking politics using hindhus as just vote base....

 

the difference is similar to kalki and kali....

 

I just googled meaning for Hindutva and Hinduism.

Tva - essenceof something

Ism - belief system or quality or practice

The Op comment on hindutva is contradicting with whatever Tva means. Hindus in hindu rashtra was never been there in our transcripts. It was always jambu dweepam or bharata khandam. May be few politicians have twisted it. We can discuss about it later.

I strongly believe that vaidika dharmam was still alive because of medieval scholars like aadi sankarchya, sankaracharya, ramanuja charya. They have tried alot to preach vaidika dharma to masses so that people can protect sanatan dharma from islamic rulers. Later, independence was the need of hour and tolerance gained lot of craze among indians due to gandhi and his followers. The world loved it during the times of world war and post independence many didn't like partition on the grounds of religion and hated some community due to loss of mother land. May be they have coined this ideology of hindutva because they want to protect what ever remained of Bharat.

Interestingly, buddhism, jainism are coexisting with hindu dharma since long back even before both religions born. So this hindutva meaning didn't have any place in people's hearts earlier.

[CaptainMaverick]

13 hours ago, dasari4kntr said:

tell me one thing clear and straight…so hindutva supports manusmrithi or not..?

First of all, There is no one original Manu Smriti. Over fifty manuscripts of the Manusmriti are now known, but the earliest discovered, most translated and presumed authentic version since the 18th century has been the Calcutta manuscript with Kulluka Bhatta commentary". Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other.

Second, The text's influence had historically spread outside India. The text influenced Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.

Manusmriti was one of the first Sanskrit texts to be translated into English, in 1776, by British philologist Sir William Jones .Manusmriti was used to construct the Hindu law code, for the East India Company-administered enclaves.

Was Manu Smriti ever taken seriously or even acknowledged as a sacred text?

In ancient and medieval India

Scholars doubt Manusmriti was ever administered as law text in ancient or medieval Hindu society. David Buxbaum states, "in the opinion of the best contemporary orientalists, it [Manusmriti] does not, as a whole, represent a set of rules ever actually administered in Hindustan. It is in great part an ideal picture of that which, in the view of a Brahmin, ought to be law".

Donald Davis writes, "there is no historical evidence for either an active propagation or implementation of Dharmasastra [Manusmriti] by a ruler or any state – as distinct from other forms of recognizing, respecting and using the text. Thinking of Dharmasastra as a legal code and of its authors as lawgivers is thus a serious misunderstanding of its history". Other scholars have expressed the same view, based on epigraphical, archaeological and textual evidence from medieval Hindu kingdoms in Gujarat, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, while acknowledging that Manusmriti was influential to the South Asian history of law and was a theoretical resource.

In British India

Prior to the British colonial rule, Sharia (Islamic law) for Muslims in South Asia had been codified as Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, but laws for non-Muslims – such as Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis – were not codified - both in regions of the subcontinent that witnessed anything up to 600 years of Islamic rule - as well as others. With the arrival of the British colonial officials, Manusmriti played a historic role in constructing a legal system for non-Muslims in South Asia and early Western perceptions about the ancient and medieval Indian society.

The British colonial officials, however, mistook the Manusmriti as codes of law, failing to recognise that it was a commentary on morals and law and not a statement of positive law. The colonial officials of the early 19th century also failed to recognise that Manusmriti was one of many competing Dharmasastra texts, it was not in use for centuries during the Islamic rule period of India. The officials resurrected Manusmriti, constructed statements of positive law from the text for non-Muslims, in order to remain faithful to its policy of using sharia for the South Asian Muslim population. Manusmriti thus played a role in constructing the Anglo-Hindu law, as well as Western perceptions about ancient and medieval era Hindu culture from the colonial times. 

 

Take Aways:

1. Manu Smriti is not an original script. Many scholars hold the existing script as not authentic & inconsistent.

2. there is no historical evidence for either an active propagation or implementation of Dharmasastra [Manusmriti] by a ruler or any state.

3. It had NOT been in use for CENTURIES for at least 800 years until the British took over India.

4. Since there was no "Sharia"- like personal laws for the Non-Hindus, the British had constructed similar laws for Hindus based on a false, adulterated text like Manu Smriti.

What was the end result? The British & the radical Islamists alike used this text to further divide Hindus in the name caste & convert them into either Islam or Christianity. Many people are very well aware of this fact but still continue to use this false text to divide Hindus. 

I suggest you do to with Manu Smriti what BR Ambedkar did: Set it on fire.

[dasari4kntr]

8 hours ago, CaptainMaverick said:

First of all, There is no one original Manu Smriti. Over fifty manuscripts of the Manusmriti are now known, but the earliest discovered, most translated and presumed authentic version since the 18th century has been the Calcutta manuscript with Kulluka Bhatta commentary". Modern scholarship states this presumed authenticity is false, and the various manuscripts of Manusmriti discovered in India are inconsistent with each other.

Second, The text's influence had historically spread outside India. The text influenced Hindu kingdoms in Cambodia and Indonesia.

Manusmriti was one of the first Sanskrit texts to be translated into English, in 1776, by British philologist Sir William Jones .Manusmriti was used to construct the Hindu law code, for the East India Company-administered enclaves.

Was Manu Smriti ever taken seriously or even acknowledged as a sacred text?

In ancient and medieval India

Scholars doubt Manusmriti was ever administered as law text in ancient or medieval Hindu society. David Buxbaum states, "in the opinion of the best contemporary orientalists, it [Manusmriti] does not, as a whole, represent a set of rules ever actually administered in Hindustan. It is in great part an ideal picture of that which, in the view of a Brahmin, ought to be law".

Donald Davis writes, "there is no historical evidence for either an active propagation or implementation of Dharmasastra [Manusmriti] by a ruler or any state – as distinct from other forms of recognizing, respecting and using the text. Thinking of Dharmasastra as a legal code and of its authors as lawgivers is thus a serious misunderstanding of its history". Other scholars have expressed the same view, based on epigraphical, archaeological and textual evidence from medieval Hindu kingdoms in Gujarat, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, while acknowledging that Manusmriti was influential to the South Asian history of law and was a theoretical resource.

In British India

Prior to the British colonial rule, Sharia (Islamic law) for Muslims in South Asia had been codified as Fatawa-e-Alamgiri, but laws for non-Muslims – such as Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis – were not codified - both in regions of the subcontinent that witnessed anything up to 600 years of Islamic rule - as well as others. With the arrival of the British colonial officials, Manusmriti played a historic role in constructing a legal system for non-Muslims in South Asia and early Western perceptions about the ancient and medieval Indian society.

The British colonial officials, however, mistook the Manusmriti as codes of law, failing to recognise that it was a commentary on morals and law and not a statement of positive law. The colonial officials of the early 19th century also failed to recognise that Manusmriti was one of many competing Dharmasastra texts, it was not in use for centuries during the Islamic rule period of India. The officials resurrected Manusmriti, constructed statements of positive law from the text for non-Muslims, in order to remain faithful to its policy of using sharia for the South Asian Muslim population. Manusmriti thus played a role in constructing the Anglo-Hindu law, as well as Western perceptions about ancient and medieval era Hindu culture from the colonial times. 

 

Take Aways:

1. Manu Smriti is not an original script. Many scholars hold the existing script as not authentic & inconsistent.

2. there is no historical evidence for either an active propagation or implementation of Dharmasastra [Manusmriti] by a ruler or any state.

3. It had NOT been in use for CENTURIES for at least 800 years until the British took over India.

4. Since there was no "Sharia"- like personal laws for the Non-Hindus, the British had constructed similar laws for Hindus based on a false, adulterated text like Manu Smriti.

What was the end result? The British & the radical Islamists alike used this text to further divide Hindus in the name caste & convert them into either Islam or Christianity. Many people are very well aware of this fact but still continue to use this false text to divide Hindus. 

I suggest you do to with Manu Smriti what BR Ambedkar did: Set it on fire.

ok…first let me start with casteist allegations on me….

నేను casteist కాదు….నా కొడుకు టీనేజ్ వయస్సు 15 కు వచ్చినా వాడికి కులం అంటే ఏంటో తెలీకుండా పెంచాను…కుల నిర్ములన కి ఎవడో చెప్పే హిందుత్వ సిద్దాంతాలు నాకు అవసరంలేదు…కుల నిర్మూలన కుటుంభం నుంచి జరగాలి అని తెలిసి భాద్యతగా పాటిస్తాను….నాకు ఎవడి certificate అవసరం లేదు ఈ విషయంలో…

తర్వత విషయం …కులం విషయంలో rss bjp ద్వంద నీతి గురించి చెప్తా…

కొన్ని శతాబ్దాలుగా భారతీయ సమాజంలో కులం వర్ణం అంటరానితనం ఉంది…దాని వళ్ళ ఆర్దిత అసమానతలు ఉన్నాయి…social equity లేదు…దాని కోసం reservations వచ్చాయి (గమనిక నేను 100% unrestricted reservations ని సమర్దించను అది ఇంతకు ముందు కూడా చెప్పా…)

ఇలా తరతరాలుగా అసమానతలతో ఉన్న సమాజాం ఇప్పుడు reservations తో పైకి వస్తుంటే …హిందుత్వా వచ్చి అసలు కులం వద్దు ఇప్పుడు అందురూ సమానం అంటుంటే ఇంతకాలం వివక్షకి , social injustice కి గురైన వాళ్ళ పరిస్తితి…?

one nation one caste అని try చేస్తే…అది ones exam NEET లా మారదా..? you guys completely forgetting the fact…india is “భన్నత్వంలో ఏకత్వం”…you cant change that…

BJP కుల రాజకీయం చేయదు అనే బ్రమలు వీడండి…BJP is no different to congress…ఇదే ద్వందనీతి అంటే…this is just a tip of iceberg…

 

ఇప్పుడు మనుసృతి గురించి….

దాన్ని తగలబెట్టు అని తేలికగా అనేసావ్ నువ్వు…నీ అనుకూల రాజకీయానికి అడ్డంగా ఉంది కాబట్టి…కానీ దాన్నించి వచ్చిన “దర్మం” ని ఏమి చేస్తావ్..ఎవరు ఏ బట్టలు వేసుకోవాలి ఏ తలపాగా కట్టుకోవాలి…ఎవరిని ఎలా సంభోదించాలి…ఫలాన కులంలో పురుషుడు వేరే ఫలానా కులం స్త్రీ తో పిల్లల్ని కంటే వాళ్ళు ఏ  కులం కి చెందుతారు…బ్రాహ్మణుకి ఎంత సంభావన ఇవ్వాలి…శూద్రునికి ఎలాంటి పని ఇవ్వాలి….వగైరా వగైరా కూలంకుషంగా ఉంది…నీ ఏ version కావాలో చెపితే అదే version వి చెప్పడానికి try చేస్తా…

వీలైతే ఇది ఒక సారి చదువు…

Dayanand Saraswati was committed to Manusmriti, except a few portions which he thought were interpolated. Savarkar believed that Manusmriti was “the scripture that is most worshippable after the Vedas” and “the basis of the spiritual and divine march of the nation.” And Golwalkar called Manu “the first, greatest and the wisest lawgiver of mankind”. 

Given this firm commitment to Manusmriti, RSS wanted it to inform India’s Constitution. On 30 November 1949, its mouthpiece, Organiser wrote: “Manu’s laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing”. RSS was perhaps referring to Ambedkar’s opposition to Manusmriti – he actually burnt it in 1927. 

But by burning Manusmriti (instead of ignoring it altogether) Ambedkar actually legitimised it as a valid document of Hinduism (which it is not). This mistake has cost the Dalit community hugely since most believe even today that it was intended for them. Sanjay Sonawani has persuasively shown that Manusmriti was very limited in scope and not intended for non-Vedic Indians. 

In any event, the RSS has reached a dead-end with Manusmriti. Peddling this extremely controversial document is costing it the support of the Dalits. So the RSS has taken up a new project: to change the Manusmriti itself. In 2017 Sanskar Bharti, an RSS affiliate said that it is “debating the removal of portions from the Manusmriti, which are anti-Dalit and anti-woman and often quoted in arguments against Hindu scriptures”. 

But RSS can’t change the fact that in the Vedic religion both hereditary varna and Manusmriti go hand in hand. One can’t revise these ancient documents, anyway. 

RSS can either promote a religion with strong varna discrimination or a religion with equality and freedom. It can’t have both.

[CaptainMaverick]

1 hour ago, dasari4kntr said:

ok…first let me start with casteist allegations on me….

నేను casteist కాదు….నా కొడుకు టీనేజ్ వయస్సు 15 కు వచ్చినా వాడికి కులం అంటే ఏంటో తెలీకుండా పెంచాను…కుల నిర్ములన కి ఎవడో చెప్పే హిందుత్వ సిద్దాంతాలు నాకు అవసరంలేదు…కుల నిర్మూలన కుటుంభం నుంచి జరగాలి అని తెలిసి భాద్యతగా పాటిస్తాను….నాకు ఎవడి certificate అవసరం లేదు ఈ విషయంలో…

తర్వత విషయం …కులం విషయంలో rss bjp ద్వంద నీతి గురించి చెప్తా…

కొన్ని శతాబ్దాలుగా భారతీయ సమాజంలో కులం వర్ణం అంటరానితనం ఉంది…దాని వళ్ళ ఆర్దిత అసమానతలు ఉన్నాయి…social equity లేదు…దాని కోసం reservations వచ్చాయి (గమనిక నేను 100% unrestricted reservations ని సమర్దించను అది ఇంతకు ముందు కూడా చెప్పా…)

ఇలా తరతరాలుగా అసమానతలతో ఉన్న సమాజాం ఇప్పుడు reservations తో పైకి వస్తుంటే …హిందుత్వా వచ్చి అసలు కులం వద్దు ఇప్పుడు అందురూ సమానం అంటుంటే ఇంతకాలం వివక్షకి , social injustice కి గురైన వాళ్ళ పరిస్తితి…?

one nation one caste అని try చేస్తే…అది ones exam NEET లా మారదా..? you guys completely forgetting the fact…india is “భన్నత్వంలో ఏకత్వం”…you cant change that…

BJP కుల రాజకీయం చేయదు అనే బ్రమలు వీడండి…BJP is no different to congress…ఇదే ద్వందనీతి అంటే…this is just a tip of iceberg…

 

ఇప్పుడు మనుసృతి గురించి….

దాన్ని తగలబెట్టు అని తేలికగా అనేసావ్ నువ్వు…నీ అనుకూల రాజకీయానికి అడ్డంగా ఉంది కాబట్టి…కానీ దాన్నించి వచ్చిన “దర్మం” ని ఏమి చేస్తావ్..ఎవరు ఏ బట్టలు వేసుకోవాలి ఏ తలపాగా కట్టుకోవాలి…ఎవరిని ఎలా సంభోదించాలి…ఫలాన కులంలో పురుషుడు వేరే ఫలానా కులం స్త్రీ తో పిల్లల్ని కంటే వాళ్ళు ఏ  కులం కి చెందుతారు…బ్రాహ్మణుకి ఎంత సంభావన ఇవ్వాలి…శూద్రునికి ఎలాంటి పని ఇవ్వాలి….వగైరా వగైరా కూలంకుషంగా ఉంది…నీ ఏ version కావాలో చెపితే అదే version వి చెప్పడానికి try చేస్తా…

వీలైతే ఇది ఒక సారి చదువు…

Dayanand Saraswati was committed to Manusmriti, except a few portions which he thought were interpolated. Savarkar believed that Manusmriti was “the scripture that is most worshippable after the Vedas” and “the basis of the spiritual and divine march of the nation.” And Golwalkar called Manu “the first, greatest and the wisest lawgiver of mankind”. 

Given this firm commitment to Manusmriti, RSS wanted it to inform India’s Constitution. On 30 November 1949, its mouthpiece, Organiser wrote: “Manu’s laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing”. RSS was perhaps referring to Ambedkar’s opposition to Manusmriti – he actually burnt it in 1927. 

But by burning Manusmriti (instead of ignoring it altogether) Ambedkar actually legitimised it as a valid document of Hinduism (which it is not). This mistake has cost the Dalit community hugely since most believe even today that it was intended for them. Sanjay Sonawani has persuasively shown that Manusmriti was very limited in scope and not intended for non-Vedic Indians. 

In any event, the RSS has reached a dead-end with Manusmriti. Peddling this extremely controversial document is costing it the support of the Dalits. So the RSS has taken up a new project: to change the Manusmriti itself. In 2017 Sanskar Bharti, an RSS affiliate said that it is “debating the removal of portions from the Manusmriti, which are anti-Dalit and anti-woman and often quoted in arguments against Hindu scriptures”. 

But RSS can’t change the fact that in the Vedic religion both hereditary varna and Manusmriti go hand in hand. One can’t revise these ancient documents, anyway. 

RSS can either promote a religion with strong varna discrimination or a religion with equality and freedom. It can’t have both.

"But RSS can’t change the fact that in the Vedic religion both hereditary varna and Manusmriti go hand in hand."

This claim is wrong! Varna was not an inherited category and the occupation determined the varna. However, a person's Jati is determined at birth and makes them take up that Jati's occupation; members could and did change their occupation based on personal strengths as well as economic, social and political factors.

So if Varna is NOT hereditary, then why would Vedic religion & Manusmriti go hand in hand?!! These narratives are the result of agenda driven Hindu haters who are still doing the bidding of the Colonialists.

[CaptainMaverick]

1 hour ago, dasari4kntr said:

ok…first let me start with casteist allegations on me….

నేను casteist కాదు….నా కొడుకు టీనేజ్ వయస్సు 15 కు వచ్చినా వాడికి కులం అంటే ఏంటో తెలీకుండా పెంచాను…కుల నిర్ములన కి ఎవడో చెప్పే హిందుత్వ సిద్దాంతాలు నాకు అవసరంలేదు…కుల నిర్మూలన కుటుంభం నుంచి జరగాలి అని తెలిసి భాద్యతగా పాటిస్తాను….నాకు ఎవడి certificate అవసరం లేదు ఈ విషయంలో…

తర్వత విషయం …కులం విషయంలో rss bjp ద్వంద నీతి గురించి చెప్తా…

కొన్ని శతాబ్దాలుగా భారతీయ సమాజంలో కులం వర్ణం అంటరానితనం ఉంది…దాని వళ్ళ ఆర్దిత అసమానతలు ఉన్నాయి…social equity లేదు…దాని కోసం reservations వచ్చాయి (గమనిక నేను 100% unrestricted reservations ని సమర్దించను అది ఇంతకు ముందు కూడా చెప్పా…)

ఇలా తరతరాలుగా అసమానతలతో ఉన్న సమాజాం ఇప్పుడు reservations తో పైకి వస్తుంటే …హిందుత్వా వచ్చి అసలు కులం వద్దు ఇప్పుడు అందురూ సమానం అంటుంటే ఇంతకాలం వివక్షకి , social injustice కి గురైన వాళ్ళ పరిస్తితి…?

one nation one caste అని try చేస్తే…అది ones exam NEET లా మారదా..? you guys completely forgetting the fact…india is “భన్నత్వంలో ఏకత్వం”…you cant change that…

BJP కుల రాజకీయం చేయదు అనే బ్రమలు వీడండి…BJP is no different to congress…ఇదే ద్వందనీతి అంటే…this is just a tip of iceberg…

 

ఇప్పుడు మనుసృతి గురించి….

దాన్ని తగలబెట్టు అని తేలికగా అనేసావ్ నువ్వు…నీ అనుకూల రాజకీయానికి అడ్డంగా ఉంది కాబట్టి…కానీ దాన్నించి వచ్చిన “దర్మం” ని ఏమి చేస్తావ్..ఎవరు ఏ బట్టలు వేసుకోవాలి ఏ తలపాగా కట్టుకోవాలి…ఎవరిని ఎలా సంభోదించాలి…ఫలాన కులంలో పురుషుడు వేరే ఫలానా కులం స్త్రీ తో పిల్లల్ని కంటే వాళ్ళు ఏ  కులం కి చెందుతారు…బ్రాహ్మణుకి ఎంత సంభావన ఇవ్వాలి…శూద్రునికి ఎలాంటి పని ఇవ్వాలి….వగైరా వగైరా కూలంకుషంగా ఉంది…నీ ఏ version కావాలో చెపితే అదే version వి చెప్పడానికి try చేస్తా…

వీలైతే ఇది ఒక సారి చదువు…

Dayanand Saraswati was committed to Manusmriti, except a few portions which he thought were interpolated. Savarkar believed that Manusmriti was “the scripture that is most worshippable after the Vedas” and “the basis of the spiritual and divine march of the nation.” And Golwalkar called Manu “the first, greatest and the wisest lawgiver of mankind”. 

Given this firm commitment to Manusmriti, RSS wanted it to inform India’s Constitution. On 30 November 1949, its mouthpiece, Organiser wrote: “Manu’s laws were written long before Lycurgus of Sparta or Solon of Persia. But to our constitutional pundits that means nothing”. RSS was perhaps referring to Ambedkar’s opposition to Manusmriti – he actually burnt it in 1927. 

But by burning Manusmriti (instead of ignoring it altogether) Ambedkar actually legitimised it as a valid document of Hinduism (which it is not). This mistake has cost the Dalit community hugely since most believe even today that it was intended for them. Sanjay Sonawani has persuasively shown that Manusmriti was very limited in scope and not intended for non-Vedic Indians. 

In any event, the RSS has reached a dead-end with Manusmriti. Peddling this extremely controversial document is costing it the support of the Dalits. So the RSS has taken up a new project: to change the Manusmriti itself. In 2017 Sanskar Bharti, an RSS affiliate said that it is “debating the removal of portions from the Manusmriti, which are anti-Dalit and anti-woman and often quoted in arguments against Hindu scriptures”. 

But RSS can’t change the fact that in the Vedic religion both hereditary varna and Manusmriti go hand in hand. One can’t revise these ancient documents, anyway. 

RSS can either promote a religion with strong varna discrimination or a religion with equality and freedom. It can’t have both.

"In 2017 Sanskar Bharti, an RSS affiliate said that it is “debating the removal of portions from the Manusmriti, which are anti-Dalit and anti-woman and often quoted in arguments against Hindu scriptures”. 

What was actually said about Manusmriti by Sanskar Bharti in 2017:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

When quotes are taken out of context with the intention of misleading the readers & propagate false narratives, so called educated people will be mislead. Sanskar Bharti was planning to tie up with the Union Ministry of Culture to promote activities that will “correct the lies that people have been fed” about ancient Hindu scriptures being “anti-Dalit and anti-woman”, starting with the Manusmriti. The writer Sanjeev Sablok of TOI omitted this & went ahead with his agenda of peddling false narratives. 

[CaptainMaverick]

@dasari4kntr

 

"Savarkar believed that Manusmriti was “the scripture that is most worshippable after the Vedas” and “the basis of the spiritual and divine march of the nation.” And Golwalkar called Manu “the first, greatest and the wisest lawgiver of mankind”. "

 

Savarkar never hailed the diabolic content in the Manusmriti.

Sanjeev Sabhlok of the TOI which you mentioned was probably quoting this of Savarkar:

"Manusmriti is that scripture which is most worship-able after Vedas for our Hindu Nation and which from ancient times has become the basis of our culture-customs, thought and practice. This book for centuries has codified the spiritual and divine march of our nation. Even today the rules which are followed by crores of Hindus in their lives and practice are based on Manusmriti. Today Manusmriti is Hindu Law. That is fundamental."

It cites only this part from his book ‘Savarkar Samagra volume 4

 Looks like he has soft corner for it since it is a text, but he doesn’t support the casteism and misogyny in it. He simply says that Hindus have been revering the Manusmriti. Besides, in the same book, he says:

"I do not consider any religious scripture to be unchangeable and valid for all times. I hold the shrutis, smritis and such other scriptures in utmost reverence and gratitude not because they are inviolable holy scriptures but because they are of historical value. I shall apply the test of present day science to all the wisdom and ignorance present in these scriptures. Only then shall I unreservedly practice and update what is essential for upholding and rejuvenating the nation!"

What has Savarkar done to eradicate Casteism?

Savarkar opened the Patit Pavan temple for Dalits.(pic below) He was welcomed by orthodox Hindus with sticks. Yet he went forward to uplift the downtrodden. 

He also held thread ceremony of the ‘untouchables’ — a thing which would be unbelievable for people of those times.(Pic below- Group photo)

In 1930, Savarkar started the first pan-Hindu Ganeshotsav. The festivities would be marked by “kirtans” rendered by the so-called untouchables. Listeners from the so-called higher castes would garland those who rendered these devotional songs. Public lectures by women and inter-caste dining by women were special features of these festivities. Savarkar was also behind many temple movements of Maharashtra, where the untouchables were encouraged to pray, recite Sanskrit hymns and conduct “abhishek” of the Vishnu idol.

In 1931, the Patitpavan temple was established in Ratnagiri; it had on its trust, representation from all castes, including those from the erstwhile untouchable caste. Savarkar also organised community meals in some temples. The first community meal for women in Maharashtra was held in the Patitpavan temple on September 21, 1931. Around 75 women were present on the occasion. By 1935, this count had gone up to 400.

On May 1, 1933, Savarkar started a cafe for Hindus of all castes, including untouchables. This was the first pan-Hindu café in entire India. He had employed a person from the Mahar caste to serve food there. This was at a time when inter-caste dining was unthinkable.

Criticising the practice of caste being decided by birth, Savarkar said: “There is a belief that heredity, birth in a particular caste decides what qualities a person imbibes… A person who has no qualities of a Brahmin…whose seven generations have not shown any qualities expected of a Brahmin is called a Brahmin because one of his forefathers, maybe 70 generations ago, possessed those qualities. He or she has the privileges of a Brahmin simply because they are born in that family. And a person born to a family considered as a lower caste is an untouchable just because some of his forefathers 70 generations ago had performed a job that was considered lowly. This system of deciding caste by birth is so unjust, damaging and an hindrance to the progress of humanity.” Savarkar argued that such a system should be abolished.

Savarkar also talked about the ways to abolish the caste system and untouchability, He said, “To achieve social revolution we first have to strike at the birth-based caste system and bridge the differences between the various castes” (Samagra Savarkar Vangmay; Part 3, page 641). In a letter to his brother Narayanrao on July 6, 1920, Savarkar wrote “I feel the need to rebel against caste discrimination and untouchability as much as I feel the need to fight against foreign occupation of India”.

In 1931 Savarkar wrote a song related to the entry of erstwhile untouchables into temples. It can be translated as “Let me see the idol of God, let me worship God.” It is said that tears rolled down Savarkar’s eyes while he was writing the song.

The poem was Malā Devāće Darśan Gheu Dyā.

To see my God in his temple

Allow me, I beseech.

Let my eyes have their fill of Him

Please, O please.

Defiled my hands are

Cleaning your filth night and day.

To cleanse them in the Pure heart

Allow me, I pray.

I am but the body, he its life,

I am the thirst only he can sate.

I am the Wretched, He the Compassionate,

O, let me fall at his feet, prostate.

I am his devotee, he my Lord,

I am a Hindu, he my Hindu God.

O Fellow Hindu Brothers,

Bar not, beg I, my way to God.

 

In his writings, he has thoroughly criticised the caste system itself. This is his essay, The Seven Shackles of Hindu society (below)

 

 

 

Savarkar clearly said:

Both chaturvarnya and caste divisions are but practices. They are not coterminous with Sanatana Dharma (*lit: timeless code, though the word Dharma is virtually untranslatable). The practice of caste division arose from a tectonic change in the practice of chaturvarnya. As the Sanatana Dharma did not die due to this tectonic change, so too it will not die if the present-day distortion that is caste division is destroyed. The true Sanatana Dharma, those true philosophical ideas expounding the character of ishwar-jeev-jagat (God-individual-creation) and the First Principle can never die.

(1930, Jatyuchchedak nibandha or essays on abolition of caste, Samagra Savarkar vangmaya, Vol. 3, p. 444)

 

In his book Hindu Rashtra Darshan, Savarkar “calls out every village, town and city to remove untouchability”.

[5]

[dasari4kntr]

27 minutes ago, CaptainMaverick said:

"But RSS can’t change the fact that in the Vedic religion both hereditary varna and Manusmriti go hand in hand."

This claim is wrong! Varna was not an inherited category and the occupation determined the varna. However, a person's Jati is determined at birth and makes them take up that Jati's occupation; members could and did change their occupation based on personal strengths as well as economic, social and political factors.

So if Varna is NOT hereditary, then why would Vedic religion & Manusmriti go hand in hand?!! These narratives are the result of agenda driven Hindu haters who are still doing the bidding of the Colonialists.

because of varna system heavily discussed in ‌రుగ్వేదం, భగవత్‌గీతా , మనుస్మ్రతి, ఉపనిషద్….

అది వంశపారంపర్యం కాదు అని చెప్తూనే దాన్ని వంశపరంపర్యం గా చేసి అవలింబంచారు ఇన్ని తరాలుగా…

ఇన్ని తరాలుగా …ఆదిపత్యం చెలాయించి…ఇప్పుడు రాజ్యాంగం వళ్ళ ఆ  ఆదిపత్యం పోతుందని…అన్ని కులాలు ఒకటే …general category …అంటే …ఎంతవరకు కరెక్టు….?