Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
pornography in hinduism

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... re=related</a><!-- m -->

Hinduism principle are based on these books

Smriti and Shrutis
Ramayana and Gita

Though they had these many books but when it comes to talk/argument they always talk from their own and never talks with reference,the reason is if they open their books they will get ashamed because it has such matters/principle. If they debate without reference then every single person gives his own views and the truth will be hidden.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... women.html</a><!-- m -->

Women in Hinduism

It is a shame that an attack against Islam is being waged by Hindus when for millenniums, Hinduism is the most oppressive system on record in its treatment of women. From conception to death, woman had to suffer in uncountable ways (details after the basic section) :

Child Marriage - Girls are to be married when 5 years old !
Dowry - Vedas prescribe this pracitice
Bride-Burning - if the dowry is insufficient
No Property
Mass Wife-Burning (Jauhar) - Often 100s are burnt at a time.
Widow-Burning (Sati) - Sanctioned by the Vedas, Puranas, practiced by Krishna’s wives, it still continues.


Female infanticide arose from the general Vedic attitude towards women. The large dowries prescribed by the Vedas (see the section of dowries below) meant that a girl was seen as a burden. The woman who gave birth to a daughter was ashamed, and much stigma attached to a lady who only gave birth to daughters. Hence infanticide arose as a convenient way of getting rid of the "burden."Aryan texts sanction this custom:

"Tasmat striyam jatam parasyanti ut pumamsam haranti"(Hence they reject a female child when born, and take up a male.) [Taitt. Samh. VI.5.10.3] [Muir I 26]

A recent U.N. report said that up to 50 million girls and women were missing from India’s population, the result of systematic discrimination extending to the abortion of female fetuses. [Verma 12.8.97] In 1921 there were more than 97 women for every 100 men in India. Seventy years later, the number dropped to 92.7 [Verma 12.8.97]


Child marriage of daughters 5-6 years old was common due to the custom of dowry and to avoid scandals [Nand 17] [Basham 167-8] [Yadav 70] [Altekar 16] [Banerjee 70]. Hindu Law books prescribe that the best partner for a man in one-third his age. Thus a man 18 year old should marry a girl 6 years old! –

"A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl of eight years of age; if (the performance of) his duties would otherwise be impeded, he must marry sooner."[Manu IX.94]

This was meant to prevent any scandals. Narada states that some of the defects to be avoided in brides are if they already had a relationship with another man or have their minds set on another, they should not be selected [Sheth 67].

2. Wives


2.1.1 Bride-Burning

This is often related to dowry, when the bride’s family cannot pay up to the amount demanded by the in-laws. Often the in-laws make demands in excess of those made at the time of marriage. When the deadline specified runs out, the bride is burned in often gruesome fashions. At least 5000 women die each year for not bringing in enough dowry. At least a dozen women die each day in `kitchen fires,’ which are often passed off as accidents, because their in-laws are not satisfied with their dowries. Only a few of the murderers are brought to justice. [Kitchen 1997]

2.1.2 Wife-Burning

A Hindu-Aryan husband could at any time accuse his wife of infidelity. In case the wife protests her innocence, the council of village elders would then order an ordeal by fire. The accused wife would be required to pass through a blazing flame. Not just death, but any signs of burns would be taken as a sign of guilt and the wife would then have to undergo the penalty for infidelity [EB 8:986 `ordeal’]. Adultery carries the death sentence in Aryan law, so either way she would have to pay with her life for her husband’s or elders’ mere suspicions. The ideal role model for this custom was Sita, Ram’s wife. She was required by her spouse, the "ideal husband"of the Hindus, to pass through the fire ordeal after her return from Sri Lanka.

2.1.3 Jauhar - Variant of Sati

Jauhar refers to the practice of the mass burning of all the wives and daughters in an entire town/district to prevent them from falling into the hands of the enemies. Often the husbands forced their unwilling spouses, sometimes the women practiced it themselves, encouraged by the elders. It is merely a variant of Sati, since it occurred in anticipation of the women’s widowhood. See the section of Sati for details by clicking here.

2.1.4 Witch-Burning

The burning of witches during the Vedic Dark Ages of Indian History ( 1500 BC - 500 BC) and the later Puranic Dark Ages ( 100 AD-1000 AD) makes the European Medieval ecclesiastical witch-hunts pale in comparison.

2.1.5 Widow-Burning (Sati)

See section 3.1


The wife could suffer seriously cruel punishment for very minor offences.

2.2.1 Amputation of Ears and Noses

Aryan husbands cut off the ears and nose of their wives if they left the house without their prior permission. The Pancatantra mentions one such story [Pancatantra p.54, I.7th story "The Weaver’s Wife"]. The weaver cut off his wife’s nose because she did not respond and he considered her unfaithful. (actually he cut off the barber’s wife’s nose who was there instead.) The Ramayana and Lord Rama practiced the cutting off of womens’ noses for minor offences, thereby providing divine sanction for the custom. Shurpanakha was a Dravidian lady ( referred to as Rakshis or female demons by the Aryans) who fell in love with Rama. She proposed to him, but he directed her to his brother Laxman. He cut off her ears and nose for this crime, and Ram condoned this act. [Alld Chmbrs 1036]

2.2.2 Death Penalty

The death penalty was prescribed for Aryan women guilty of infidelity. The Manu Smrti, the most authoritative Indo-Aryan law-book, states

"When a woman, proud of her relations [or abilities] deceives her husband ( with another man), then the king should [ensure that] she be torn apart by dogs in place much frequented by people"[Manu Smrti 8:371] "And the evil man should be burnt in a bed of red-hot iron"[Manu Smrti 8:371-2]

VIII.371. "If a wife, proud of the greatness of her relatives or (her own) excellence, violates the duty which she owes to her lord, the king shall cause her to be devoured by dogs in a place frequented by many. VIII.372. Let him cause the male offender to be burnt on a red-hot iron bed; they shall put logs under it, (until) the sinner is burned (to death)."[Manu Smrti Buhler VIII 371-372]

That this custom was prevalent in the 9the century is confirmed by Arab reports. Merchant Sulaiman, an Arab traveller of the 9th century states that "If any man in the Indies runs away with a wife and abuses her body they kill both him and the woman, unless it be proved that she was forced, then the man only is punished with death; but if the woman consented to the evil deed, they are punished with death, both one and the other."[Arab p.56]

Ram, the ideal husband, showed little regard to female life. Ram killed Tataka, a "Rakshi"[Alld Chmbrs 1048].

Infidelity to husband was considered a grave sin and it was believed that such women went to Aksaya hell [Br.P. 87.61 in Sheth 98]. The husband had the power to curse the wife who was disloyal to him. Thus the sage Gautama cursed his wife Ahalya for sleeping with Indra though through no fault of her own. [Sheth 99] (In the Kautilyan period) if a woman was found guilty of a carnal crime her generative organs were cut off and she was ultimately sentenced to death [Arth.IV.13 in Jain p.164], although it is not clear whether this was only for intercourse with slaves. Not only that, but adultery is defined as the simple touching of clothes and even conversing with men:

VIII. 356. He who addresses the wife of another man at a Tirtha, outside the village, in a forest, or at the confluence of rivers, suffer (the punishment for) adulterous acts (samgrahana).

VIII. 357. Offering presents (to a woman), romping (with her), touching her ornaments and dress, sitting with her on a bed, all (these acts) are considered adulterous acts (samgrahana).

VIII. 358. If one touches a woman in a place (which ought) not (to be touched) or allows (oneself to be touched in such a spot), all (such acts done) with mutual consent are declared (to be) adulterous (samgrahana). [Manu VIII.356-358]


2.3.1 No Property

Women and Sudras can, in the Aryan-Vaishnava system, have no property:

A wife, a son, and a slave, these three are declared to have no property; the wealth which they earn is (acquired) for him to whom they belong. A Brahmana may confidently seize the goods of (his) Sudra (slave); for, as that (slave) can have no property, his master may take his possessions. [Manu VIII.416-417]

2.3.2 Dress and Veiling

Aryan women had to wear a face-veil when going out. As usual, several observers, seeing Arab women veiled, assumed it must be due to Muslim "contamination."They are not aware that Muslim ladies who do this do it as an act of modesty, and are ignorant of Indian scriptures. Sanskrit literature mentions the

The practice of using veils by women, particularly in well-to-do families, was in vogue. Prabhakaravardhana’s daughter Rajyasri put on a veil when she met her husband, the Maukhari Grahavarman of Kanauj, for eh first time. It is known from Vacaspati Misra (9C AD) that women in good families observed the purdah system and did not appear in public without veils ... However, Dhoyi, the author of the 12 C poetical work the Pavanaduta, relates that the women of Vijayapura (in Bengal) did not observe the purdah system’ [CHI Vol II #37 p.595 # 37 `Some aspects of the position of women in Ancient India’ DCGanguly p.594 ff]

"Harsha’s [1099-1101] [Lohara dynasty] coins [depict] a half cross-legged goddess [and] a veil appears on the head"[GuptaCoins p.39]

"Gangayadeva’s [one of the Kalachuri rulers of Dahala, the country around Jabalpur in MP] (1019-1042AD) coins ... the female is shown as having a veil on her head which hangs down to the shoulders and upper arms"[GuptaCoins p.39]

"Many of the female figures on the gold coins, like the sculpture and literature of the [Gupta] age, do reflect a somewhat new idea of feminine beauty which we now call classical [thinner and more slender]"[GuptaCoins 21]

It is now generally accepted that the purdah ( seclusion and veiling) was existent in India since ancient Aryan times. [Altekar 167-70] [Indra 73] [Shamram 24] [Ojha-Cutlture 66-67] In fact, certain high-class women refused to entertain strangers [Altekar 175] [Nand 5-6] It seems that the bodice was imported by Muslims :

"In several parts of India ... bodices [are worn by ladies under the cloth] ... this, i am told, is a modern innovation, and borrowed from the Mohamedans."[DuBois p.341]

2.3.3 Dowry

The Vedas prescribe that a dowry be given by the bride’s family to the groom. The Rig Veda states that cows and gifts given by the father of the bride to the daughter accompanied the bride’s procession [Rg Ved X.85] [Apte 12]. Kakshivat says he became rich by the father-in-law giving him 10 chariots and maids and 1060 cows during the marriage ceremony [Rg Ved I.126] [Apte 13]. The ancient custom of kanyadan, where the father presented his daughter with jewelry and clothes at the time of her marriage, and vardakshina where the father presented the groom with kith and kind are, in essence the dowry system.

2.3.4 Staying Alone

It may be thought that only the absence of the husband could temporarily alleviate the condition of Aryan women. Alas, even then she was under constant suspicion. To prevent nightly intrigues, she cannot even sleep alone:

"whilst her husband is absent, she shall sleep with one of her female relatives and not alone"[Vasishta’s Padma Purana]

"Husbands are not supposed to have intercourse with a wife who bore only daughters."[Hindu Law and Custom, p.145]

2.3.5 Going Out and Education

Women and Sudras were declared to be unfit for study of their own sacred texts:

"And as women, Sudras and the inferior members of the twice-borne classes were unfitted for hearing the Veda, and were infatuated in desiring the blessings, arising from the ceremonies, the muni, with a vision to their felicity, in his kindness composed the narrative called the Mahabharata."[Bhag.Pur. I.4.25] [Muir III,p.42]

Also Madhava Acharya stated:

"They [women and Sudras] are debarred ... from being competent students of the Veda"[Vedarthaprakasha of Madhava Acharyya on the Taittriya Yajur Veda, quoted in Muir III,p.66]

2.3.6 No Divorce

Divorce was not permitted.

2.3.7 No Remarriage

Even if the wife ran away from the harsh husband, she could never get remarried as long as she is in the confines of Hindu tradition.

3. Widows and Elderly Women

3.1 Sati (Widow-Burning)

The Aryans, upon their invasion of India 1500 B.C. introduced the horrific custom of Sati, i.e. the burning of a woman after the death of her husband. When performed singly it is referred to as Sati, when performed en masse by all the women and daughters of a town in anticipation of their widowhood (eg. when the men were to fight a battle against all odds), it is known as Jauhar. It is sanctioned by their most sacred texts, and was practiced from the fall of the Semito-Dravidian Indus Valley civilization to the modern age.

3.1.1 Scriptural Sanction

The most sacred of Aryan scriptures are the Vedas, and the Rig Veda, the oldest Veda, first mentions the custom of Sati. The following famous "Sati Hymn"of the Rig Veda was (and still is) recited during the actual immolation of the widow [Kane 199-200]:

"Let these women, whose husbands are worthy and are living, enter the house with ghee (applied) as corrylium ( to their eyes). Let these wives first step into the pyre, tearless without any affliction and well adorned."[Rig Veda X.18.7] [Kane 199-200]

In recent times some Aryan apologists have arisen who try to prove that this verse does not sanction sati. This concept arises from a mistaken reading of the word agne or agneh , which they believe is agre . This is a wrong interpretation, and other evidence exists that the Aryans definitely practiced Sati from the earliest times. They distorted this verse which directs the widow to enter the pyre (agneh) so as to mean that the wife was to rise from her pyre and go to the front (agre). In addition to these examples, ancient Aryan scripture encourages Sati. The Garudapurana favorably mentions the immolation of a widow on the funeral pyre, and states that women of all castes, even the Candalla woman, must perform Sati. The only exceptions allowed by this benevolent author is for pregnant women or those who have young children. If women do not perform Sati, then they will be reborn into the lowly body of a woman again and again till they perform Sati. [Garudapurana II.4.91-100] [Kane 237] According to Vasishta’s Padma-Purana, a woman must, on the death of her husband, allow herself to be burnt alive on the same funeral pyre [Abbe DuBois 345]. The Vishnusmirti gives two choices for the widow:

"If a woman’s husband dies, let her lead a life of chastity, or else mount his pyre"[Vishnusmrti xxv.14] [Clayton 13]

Brahma is one of the main Aryan gods, being the creator of the world (later he was identified as an incarnation of Vishnu). One of the Puranas is named after him, the Brahma Purana. Like other Puranas, it was composed after the Vedas (Pandits hold 4000 B.C., Indologists 700 B.C.) This scripture also sanctions sati:

"It is the highest duty of the woman to immolate herself after her husband,"[Br.P. 80.75] [Sheth 103]

Once again we hear that Sati is sanctioned by the Vedas:

" enjoined by the Vedas,"[Br.P. 80.75] [Sheth 103]

and is

"greatly reputed in all the worlds"[Br.P. 80.75] [Sheth 103]

Long life is promised to the sati:

"She [the sati] lives with her husband in heaven for as many years as there are pores in the human body, ie. for 35 million years."[Br.P. 80.76, 80.77] [Sheth 103]

Vishnu Dharmasutra XXV.14 contains the statement:

On her husband’s death, the widow should observe celibacy or should ascend the funeral pyre after him.

Several other scriptures sanction widow-burning. Some of these are as given below [Wilkins]:

"It is proper for a woman, after her husband’s death to burn herself in the fire with his copse; every woman who thus burns herself shall remain in paradise with her husband 35,000,000 years by destiny."
"The wife who commits herself to flames with her husband’s copse shall equal Arundathi and reside in Swarga (heaven)."
"Accompanying her husband, she shall reside so long in Swarga as the 35,000,000 of hairs on the human body.
"As the snake-catcher forcibly drags the serpent from his earth, so bearing her husband [from hell] with him she enjoys heavenly bliss."
"Dying with her husband, she sanctifies her maternal and paternal ancestors and the ancestors of him to whom she gave her virginity."
"Such a wife adorning her husband, in celestial felicity with him, greatest and most admired, shall enjoy the delights of heaven while fourteen Indras reign."
"Though a husband had killed a Brahman, broken the ties of gratitude, or murdered a friend she expiates the crime."
Thus, it is evident that the custom of Sati was introduced by the Aryans since it is encouraged in their scriptures and many goddesses performed the act.

3.1.2 Aryan Sati Goddesses

The Aryan origin of Sati is evident from the fact that several Aryan ladies and `goddesses’ performed Sati :

Several of Krishna’s wives performed Sati upon his death, including Rukmini, Rohini, Devaki, Bhadraa and Madura [M.Bh. Mausalaparvan 7.18] [Alld.Ch. 977, 1018-1019: Rukmini]
Madri, second wife of Pandu, considered an incarnation of the goddess Dhriti, performed Sati [M.Bh. Adiparvan 95.65] [Alld Ch 985]
Rohini, a wife of Vasudev, Krishna’s father, who gave birth to Balram ( Devki’s child) and later became a Sati. [Alld. Ch. 1018]
"The 8 queens of Krishna, who have been named, with Rukmini at their head, embraced the body of Hari, and entered the funeral fire. Revati also embracing the corpse of Rama, entered the blazing pile, which was cool to her, happy in contact with her lord. Hearing these events, Ugrasena and Anakadundubhi, with Devaki and Rohini, committed themselves to the flames."[Vishnu Pur. 5.38] [Vishnu Pur. {Wilson} p.481]

3.1.3 Ancient Travallers’ Accounts

Even ancient observers mentioned the barbaric practice of Sati. Alexander the Great and the Greeks observed Sati in Punjab [Onescrites in Strabo 30] [Barth 59]. The Greek Diodorus Siculus who lived in the 1st century BC, mentioned the practice of Sati in his account of the Punjab in the 4th century BC [EB 11:421]. Indigenous historical evidence substantiates this, for

"The earliest recorded historical instance of Sati is that of the wife of the Hindu general Keteus, who died in 316 B.C. while fighting against Antigonos. Both his wives were eager to perform sati, but as the elder one was with child, only the younger one alone was allowed to carry out her wish."[Sheth 104]

The Sati was customary for the widows of Kshatriyas in the end of the first century BC [Strabo] [Harper 273]. Sati was performed by all the Aryan races, for it is recorded that the Germanic tribes used to immolate the widows of chieftain to accompany the husband to Valhalla [Harper 273] [Davidson 150]. The Arab writer Al-Beruni mentioned the practice of Sati among the Hindus. [AlBer. U II.LXIX; II.LXXIII; Sachau ii p.155, ii p.170]

"She [the widow] has only to choose between two things - either to remain a widow as long as ashe lives, or to burn herself, and the latter eventuality is considered preferable ... As regards the wives of kings, they are in the habit of burning them whether they wish it or not."[Al-Beruni. II.LXIX] [Sachau II.p.155]

"Nicolo deo Contei states that as many as 3000 of the wives and concubines of the kings of Vijayanagar were pledged to be burnt with their lord on his death [and often ministers and palace servants accompanied the king in death]."[Basham 188] Strangely the practice increased in popularity in Bengal during the British expansion, despite the best efforts of Ram Mohan Roy to stop it [Harper 273]. This is also confirmed by the Abbe DuBois:

"[Sati] is more in vogue on the banks of the Ganges, [while] in Bengal Presidency [only] 706 suttees occurred in 1817 [and in] the Madras Presidency [out of] 30 million inhabitants not 30 allow themselves to be burnt each year."[DuBois 357] "[the wife] must, on the death of her husband, allow herself to be burnt alive on the same funeral pyre [of her husband]"[DuBois 345]

Sati still continues to this day. In 1990, more than 50 widows were burnt alive in sati. [Sonali Verma, Reuter, 12 August 1997, New Delhi] Note: The data gathered for the report of 50 widows burned to death was not gathered on a collective basis, but as data for micro-sections of India.

3.1.4 Bizarre Hypotheses

Several bizarre hypotheses have been set forth to explain the occurrence of Sati, often with less than honest intentions.

Corruption : Another silly notion is that the custom of Sati started when Hindu society started to "degenerate."[Now, THAT was an oxymoron!] If so, then why do the Vedas take this custom for granted? Why did Krishna’s wives perform sati? Are we to then conclude that Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu himself, was a corrupt Hindu? Again, where did this corruption come from? When did it start? If some outsiders, then it must be one of the Greeks, Bactrians, etc. But they came 1000 years after Krishna! Krishna was one of the earliest Aryan figures, and this story could hence have not been an invention, since the Aryans were very scared of altering anything in their tradition. Hence the Aryans stand condemned for introducing sati.

Islamic Khalifat and Sati: One far-fetched idea ascribes the origin of Sati as being due to the molestation of Hindu women by Muslim men. Needless to say, this would imply the existence of Muslims to molest Krishna’s wives, Madri and the galaxy of Vedic Aryan women who performed self-immolation. It also overlooks the accounts by ancient Greeks and Arabs on the prevalence of Sati. In fact, the Muslim emperors took active steps to abolish Sati. (eg. Ghiyasudin, Akbar, Muhammad Tughlaq) and the Sufi saints condemned it.

Killing of women publicly was not considered a grave crime [Nand 28] [Hopkins 282] [Basham 187] Dress - Vedic women wore paridhanam and vasahantaram [Nand 28] [Altekar 279-81] later dress: uttariya( upper portion), kancuka (bodice)and candetaka(petticoat) sari later times worn. Johar [Nand 177-8] Muh Tughlaq opposed Sati [nand 173]

4. Religion

The ascetic emphasis in Aryan Indian religious life led to an extremely negative attitude towards women.

4.1 Aryan Vaishnaviasm

4.1.1 Vedic Vaishanvism

Women in the Vedic period were harshly treated, as depicted above. The presence of Sati was common.

4.1.2 Buddhism and Jainism

Buddhism and Jainism were both protest movements against the Vedic Vaishnava system. However, they did not lead to any major changes in the status of women. This was due to the emphasis placed by these religions on asceticism. Thus, although Sati was opposed by these reformers, yet women were considered as hurdles on the path to liberation. The Buddha was very strict in his insistence on asceticism. He left his home and wife to become attain nirvana and considered women a hindrance to that goal:

"Buddha is said to have induced his disciples not to look at a woman or even talk to her"[Sacred Books of the East,XI p.91 cited in N.N.Bhatt p.44]

4.1.3 Vaishnavism

Women are generally termed as thieves, dacoits, pirates, thirsty tigresses and hypocrite cats in the medieval Nath literature. [Obsc 245] Chaitanya was one of the major saints during the medieval period. He spread Vaishnavism in Eastern India, but aroused the approbation of the Orthodox Aryan-Vaishnavas because he allowed "conversion"from lower castes. Even this "liberal"man had highly negative opinions of women:

"Chaitanya thought it to be a sin to talk, think or even dream of women and that even the sight of a wooden statue of a woman can distract the mind and be responsible for immorality. He advised people to avoid being alone even with their own mother , sister or daughter."[Nand 124-127]

After all, Chaitanya was a Vaihnavite. Gandhi’s insistence on strict vegetarianism and celibacy among his disciples was in keeping with the traditions of Vaishnava ascetic ethics [EB 20:528:2a] Gandhi ordered many of the erotic temple sculptures of India to be destroyed. "[A Vedic Graduate] should not look at a naked woman."[Manu 8:453] "Let a decent man ever avoid by night ... a loose woman"[V.P. Book III Ch. XII p. 250] "In the Buddhist Age, a slave-girl who was obliged to sleep with her master, was often deprived of her nose and ears by her mistress and there was no lawto protect her."[Jain 162]

4.2 Dravidian Shaivism

Dravidian women enjoyed much greater freedom than their Aryan counterparts.

4.3 Repression and Perversions: Incest

Due to the strict restrictions and regulations one feature arose that is apparently more common in Aryan society than in any other part of the world: incest. References to this practice abound. Often the girls were unwilling, but were then forceed by their brothers/fathers. References abound even in the Rig Veda, showing that the perversion of brother-sister incest was introduced by the Aryans (Astaghfirullah al-Azeem):

Pushan is the lover of his sister [Rg Ved VI.55.4] [Apte 11]
Agni is the lover of his own sister [Rg Ved X.3.3] [Apte 11]
Ashvins are referred to as the sons of Savitar and Ushas who are brother and sister [Apte 11].
The Ashvisns married Surya and Savitri who is their sister [RV I.116.19].
Agni is the son of his father and his sister [Rg Ved.I.91.7]
Yama wards off his sister Yami, saying marriage between brother and sister is forbidden [R.V.X.10] [Apte 11]
Father-daughter incest occurs in the famous story of Prajapati (later identified with Brahma, in tunr incorporated as an incarnation of Vishnu) and his daughter [RV III.31.1-2]. Moreover, this was punished. Prajapati is thought to have done something wrong, and Prajapati was pierced by Agni as a punishment [Sat.Br. XIII.9] [Apte 63].

It is evident that the strict laws on male-female relations led to the repression of normal practices and the rise of various perversions like brother-sister incest, father-daughter incest etc. Even to this day incest of varying degrees (father-daughter, mother-son, brother-sister, etc.) is extremely common amongst the Indo-Aryans. No other race on earth has ever recorded such a prevalence of this practice. Just as sodomy had its home in Persia, Lesbianism in ancient Lesbos, so incest has its home amongst the Indo-Aryans.

5. History of Women’s Status

There were exceptions to the rule, even during the Vedic Dark Ages following the collapse of the Indus civilization. Eastern India (Purvadesha), including Bengal, with its majority Mon-Khmer population, was only slightly Aryanized. The Shakti cult (mother-goddess) predominated (75 % of all the idolatrous population is sill Shaktis), and women here had a much higher degree of freedom. Thus for instance they were not required to wear the veil. Shakti (or Tantric) cults involved the worship of women, and the acceptance of their supremacy. Needless to say, the Shakti cult was only limited to Bengal and Assam. The Dravidian women were also freeer. Malabar was a center of the Tantric form of the Shiva-Shakti cult, and matriarchal customs still prevail. Till recently, polyandry existed.

Besides these two islands, the rest of India confirmed to the picture given above. This lasted until the establishment of the Islamic Khalifat of Hindustan in the 12th century A.D. Muslims came to form more than 50 % of the population of Hindustan proper (India north of the Narmada), and under Islam, the status of women improved considerably.

In modern times the degradation of women’s status is related to the rise in Hindu Fundamentalism (in actual fact, a thinly disguised form of Aryan Fanaticism). The extremist organizations that comprise the Sangh Parivar (BJP, RSS, Bajrang Dal, Ranvir Sena, VHP etc.) are reviving the practice of Sati, dowry, female infanticide etc. in various parts of India. Thus, in modern times the status of women has declined sharply due to the activities of Hindu (i.e., Aryan) Fundamentalist organizations.

A wife, a son, a slave , these are declared to have no property; the wealth which they earn is (acquired) for him to whom they belong. Manu 8.416 Manu 8.299 [A wife, a son, a slave, a pupil and a (younger) brother of the full blood, who have committed faults, may be beaten with a rope or a split bambboo. 9.77 ? When he created them) Manu allotted to women (a love of their) bed, (of their( seat and (of) ornament, impure desires, wrath, dishonesty, malice and bad conduct.


[Rg Ved] = Rig Veda
[M.Bh.] = Mahabharata
[Br.Pur.] = Brahma Purana
[Manu] = `Manu Smirti’, Manu, Aryavartta, 4400 B.C-1500 B.C. ? translations exist, see eg.
[Manu Smrti, Doniger and Smith] = `The Laws of Manu’ W.Doniger and B.K.Smith, Penguin India N.Delhi 1991
[Manu Smrti Buhler] = `The Laws of Manu’ , 1500 BC transld by G. Buhler
[Garuda] = `Garuda Purana’
[Vishnu Dh.Sh.] = `Vishnu Dharma Shastra’
[Vishnu Sm.] = `Vishnu Smrti’
[Bhag.Pur.] = `Bhagavata Purana’
[Vishnu Pur.] = `Vishnu Purana’, see eg.
[Wilson] = `The Vishnu Purana A System of Hindu Mythology and Tradition’ transl. H.H.Wilson London 1840
[Alld Chmbrs] = `Allied-Chambers Transliterated Hindi-English Dictionary
[EB] = Encyclopedia Brittanica
[Kovoor] = `Gods, Demons and Spirits’ - by Dr. Abraham T. Kovoor, Jaico Publishing House. ed. V.A.Menon 1990 Bombay
[Al-Beruni] =
[Panda] = `The Rationale for Asrtology ‘
[Abbe DuBois] = Hindu Customs, Manners and Ceremonies’, Abbe J.A.DuBois, transl. by H.K.Beauchamp from French, 3rd ed. Oxford 1906
[Clayton] = ` The RigVeda and Vedic Religion’, A.C.clayotn, 1913, 1980 reprt. Bharati Prakashan Varanasi 1980
[Barth] = ` The Religions of India’, A. Barth, tr. Rev. J.Wood, reprt. 1978 Light and Life Publishers N. Delhi
[Kane] = `History of Dharmasashtra’, M.P.V.Kane Vol. IV, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute. 1953
[Wilkins] = Wilkins: Modern Hinduism, London, 1975, pages 186 and 223.
[Sharma] = S.R. Sharma, The Making of Modern India, Bombay, 1951, p. 478.
[Gopal] = `This Hindi and Dev Nagari’, Madan Gopal
[S & T] = Science and Technology in Ancient India
[Arab] = `India as described by the Arab Travellers ‘ by Dr. A.K.Srivastava, Sahitya Sansar Prakashan, Gorakhpur, India 1967 p.56
[Jain] = `Labour in Ancient India’ - P.C.Jain Sterling Publishers (P) Ltd. N.Delhi 1971
[Meyer] = `Sexual Life in Ancient India’ - J.J.Meyer The Standard Literature Co. Ltd. reprint Calcutta 1952 p.254
[NNBhatt] = `History of Indian Erotic Literature’ - N.N.Bhattacharya, Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd. N.Delhi 1975
[Sheth] = `Religion and Society in The Brahma Purana’ - S.Sheth, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. N.Delhi 1979
[KS] = `Kamasutra’, Vatsyayana
[KS(RB)] = `The Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana’ -tr. Sir Richard F. Burton Penguin India N Delhi 1993
[KS(MRA)] = `The Kamasutra of Vatsyayana’ - Mulk Raj Anand and Lance Dane, Arnold Publishers Delhi 1990
[Nand] = `Women in Delhi Sultanate’ - L.C.Nand Vohra Publishers and Distributors Allahabad 1989
[Cakravarti] = `Sex Life in Ancient India’ - Candra Cakravarti Agents Firma KLMukhopadhyay Calcutta 1963
[Susrtua] = `Susruta Samhita ( A Scientific Synopsis)’ - P.Ray, H.Gupta & M.Roy; Indian National Science Academy N.Dehli 1980
[Mothers] = `The Mothers’ - Robert Briffault, George Allen and Unwin Ltd. London 1927 3 vols.
[alchemy] = `Sexual Secrets - the alchmey of ecstasy’ - N.Douglas & P.Slinger Arrow Books London 1982
[Ragozin] = `Vedic India’ - ZARagozin Munshi Ram Manoharlal Ltd. 1961 2 ed.
[Gupta Coins] = `Art in Gupta and Post-Gupta Coinage’ BNMukherjee Lucknow 1985 Lucknow State Museum
[Patil] = `Dasa-Sudra Slavery’ - S.Patil, Allied Publishers Priv Ltd. New Delhi 1982
[Courtzns] = `The World of Courtezans’ - Moti Chandra, Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd. Delhi 1973
[MPS] copy
[Plaisir] `Plaisirs d’Amour’ An Erotic Guide to the Senses by Elizabeth Nash, Harper Collins Feb 1995
[Altekar] = `The Position of Women in Hindu Civilization’, Delhi 1973, A.S.Altekar
[Sharma] = `Social Life in Northern India’ B.N.Sharma, Delhi 1966
[Indra] = `The Status of Women in Ancient India’, Prof. Indra, Banaras 1955
[Ojha] = `North Indian Social Life’, Ojha, Delhi 1975
[Banerjee] = `Some Aspects of the Postion of Women in Ancient India’, G.R.Banerjee
[Yadav] = `Society and Culture in Northern India in 12th century’, B.N.S.Yadav Allahabad 1973
[Hopkins] = `The Social and Military Postion of the Ruling Caste in Ancient India’, E.W.Hopkins, Varanasi 1972
[Pancatantra] = `The Pancatantra’, tr. A.W.Ryder, Jaico Publishing House, 1949, Bombay (1991 ed.)
[Jolly] = `Hindu Law and Custom’, p.145
[Obsc] = `Obscure Religious Cults’ - S. Dasgupta, Firma KLM Calcutta 1969
[Harper] = `Harper’s Dictionary of Hinduism’, M. and J. Stutley, Harper and Row Publishers N.Y. 1977
[Davidson] = `Gods and Myths of Northern Europe’, H.R.E.Davidson, Hammondsworth 1964, p.150 - Germani sati
[Apte] = `The Sacrament of Marriage in Hindu Society’, U.M.Apte, Ajanta Publishers 1978 Delhi
[Muir] = `Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India’, J.Muir, London, Truebner and Co. 1873 2nd ed. Vol. III
[Verma 12.8.97] = Sonali Verma, `Indian women still awaiting Independance’, Reuter.12 Aug. 1997, New Delhi]
[Kitchen 1997] = `Kitchen fires Kill Indian Brides with Inadequate Dowry, July 23, 1997, New Delhi, UPI
[Muir] = `Original Sanskrit Texts on the Origin and History of the People of India. Their Religion and Institutions. Part I Mythical and Legendary Accounts of the Origin of Caste.

Vedas teach racial conflict
At about 2000-1500 BC Aryans came to Sindh and Punjab from arctic circle,southern Russia ,Germany via iran and Afghanistan.They came in groups and settle here.Before the Aryans invaded the to sindh the civilization which exist on the land was of Indus.The original inhabitants was called DASYUS.The Aryans wanted to expand their civilization and they destroyed the cities of the DASYUS.They called themselves and bright skinned people dasyus as the dark skinned people.They fight with them killed them and also the Aryan clans fought among themselves.One group which was lead by an Aryan named Bharata won the battle and thus the name of the land is called Bharatadesa.

Initially the Dasyus (Sudra) was not included in the society but later they included into the society as Sudra as workers and were degraded.
The Aryans compiled Vedas and talks about their civilization and some incidents of that time.
Initially the women were allowed to attend the assemblies but later during the compilation of the yajur veda womens were not allowed to attend the assemblies and were degraded.

Source Indian History.. for reference.

Reference from Scriptures

Quotes from the Rig Veda, the original Holy Book of the Aryan conquerors of India (which has now been corrupted but is still to this day in use as the main Hindu religious text) contains a great many references to the race of the conquerors and the conquered.

According to the Rig Veda, the leader of the Aryan invasion was one Indra, and his role in “slaying the Dasyus” (the Negroids in India) is prominent in the Rig Veda:

"Thou, Indra, art the destroyer of all the cities, the slayer of the Dasyus, the prosperer of man, the lord of the sky." - RgV. VIII 87.6

The Rig Veda goes on to use the word “black” in a number of instances to describe the Dasyu:

"Indra, the slayer of Vrittra, the destroyer of cities, has scattered the Dasyu (hosts) sprang from a black womb." RgV. II 20.6

The Rig Veda praises the god who "destroyed the Dasyans and protected the Aryan colour." - Rg.V. III 34.9

It then goes on to thank the god who "bestowed on his white friends the fields, bestowed the sun, bestowed the waters." - Rg.V. I 100.18

Black skin is repeatedly referred to with abhorrence in the Rig Veda: starting with a description of the "black skin" (`Krishnam Vacham') in RgV. IX 41.1, Sam. V I.491 and II.242.

For example in RgV. IX 73 it is said that “stormy gods who rush on like furious bulls and scatter the black skin", and it claims that “the black skin, the hated of Indra" will be swept out of heaven - RgV. IX 73.5

Rg.V. I 130.8 tells of how the “black skin” was conquered:

"Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin."

The Rig Veda thanks god for "scattering the slave bands of black descent", and for stamping out "the vile Dasyan colour." - Rg.V. II.20.7, II 12.4

It also contains this choice remark which sums up the Aryan’s opinion of their non-White subjects: "Black skin is impious" (‘Dasam varnam adharam’) -Sans., Rg.V. II.12.4

Other extracts from the Rig Veda further illustrate the sharp racial divisions in this time:

Indra - 1.130.8 - "Indra in battles help his Aryan worshipper, he who hath hundred helps at hand in every fray, in frays that win the light of heaven. Plaguing the lawless he gave up to Manu's seed the dusky skin; Blazing, 'twere, he burns each covetous man away, he burns, the tyrannous away."

Indra - 4.16.13 - "Thou to the son of Vidathin, Rjisvan, gavest up mighty Mrgaya and Pipru. Thou smotest down the swarthy fifty thousand, and rentest forts as age consumes a garment."

Indra - 5.29.10 - "One car-wheel of the Sun thou rolledst forward, and one thou settest free to move for Kutsa. Thou slewest noseless Dasyus with thy weapon, and in their home o'erthrewest hostile speakers." ("Noseless Dasyus" would suggest a reference to flat nosed Negroid types)

Soma Pavamana - 9.41.1 - "ACTIVE and bright have they come forth, impetuous in speed like bulls, driving the black skin far away."

Soma Pavamana - 9.73.5 - "O'er Sire and Mother they have roared in unison bright with the verse of praise, burning up riteless men, Blowing away with supernatural might from earth and from the heavens the swarthy skin which Indra hates."


Indra - 10.23.4 - "With him too is this rain of his that comes like herds: Indra throws drops of moisture on his yellow beard. When the sweet juice is shed he seeks the pleasant place, and stirs the worshipper as wind disturbs the wood."

Indra - 10.96.8 - "At the swift draught the Soma-drinker waxed in might, the Iron One with yellow beard and yellow hair. He, Lord of Tawny Coursers, Lord of fleet-foot Mares, will bear his Bay Steeds safely over all distress."

Indra - 1.9.3 - "O Lord of all men, fair of cheek, rejoice thee in the gladdening lauds, Present at these drink-offerings."

Indra - 1.100.18 - "He, much invoked, hath slain Dasyus and Simyus, after his wont, and laid them low with arrows. The mighty Thunderer with his fair-complexioned friends won the land, the sunlight, and the waters."

Indra - 1.101.1 - "SING, with oblation, praise to him who maketh glad, who with Rjisvan drove the dusky brood away. Fain for help, him the strong whose right hand wields the bolt, him girt by Maruts we invoke to be our Friend."

Indra - 1.103.3 - "Armed with his bolt and trusting in his prowess he wandered shattering the forts of Dasas. Cast thy dart, knowing, Thunderer, at the Dasyu; increase the Arya's might and glory, Indra.

4 "For him who thus hath taught these human races, Maghavan, bearing a fame-worthy title, Thunderer, drawing nigh to slay the Dasyus, hath given himself the name of Son for glory."

More details on

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href=""> ... 50664.html</a><!-- m -->

Some Truth from Hindus scriptures

Rama disfigured and mutilated many women by cutting off her noses, breasts, ears etc., and tortured them (Soorpanaki, Ayomuki).

Rama said, “Women should not be trusted” and that “Secrets should not be confided to the wife” (Ayodhya kandam, Chapter 100).

Sambuka was slain (by Rama) because he was making penance which was forbidden to hime by Vedas as he was a “Shudra” (Uttara kanadam, Chapter 76).

Looking at is hand Rama said the Sanskirt slogan “O right hand, you kill this Asche Shudra unhesitatingly as killing this Shudra is the only way to get back the life of the deceased Brahmin boy.”

Are you not one of the limbs of Rama? (Valmiki Ramayana)
Note: This Rama, who mercilessly took away the life of Sambuka for no other fault than that of making penance, is held as the Avatar (incarnation) of Vishnu (God)! If there were kings like Rama alive now, alas! what would be the plight of those who are called “Shudras?”.

Lord krishna was very fond of looking at naked young girls. Once upon a time Krishna, in order to get a full view of some bathing virgin girls, went to the extent of hiding their clothes on the tree top just to get a panoramic view. Does he have divine immunity from looking at naked women?
The Gita, a Holy book of the Hindus, quotes that when these bathing low caste girls begged for the return of their clothes, Lord Krishna demanded that they come out of the water with their hands raised instead of covering their bodies.

Oh my innocent Hindu brethren! Can this action be attributed to god? Is this God capable of indulging in such ungodly acts? Will Hindu mothers tolerate their son imitating god Krishna??

According to Hinduism, god Shiva’s head is the source of the river Ganges and his head is also the place where the moon is located (if this was really a fact then why should America send astronaut Neil Armstrong 240,000 miles away to the moon)

According to Puranas, goddess Parvathi, wife of God Shiva, sought Shivas’s permission to have a baby When Shiva refused, Paravathi took dirt from her body and created Lord Ganesh. (The late E.V.R. Preiyar used to call this god a “bundle fo dirt”).

Later God Shiva mistakenly chopped off his own son’s head. How could a god make such a foolish mistake? Would such a god solve your problems or make them more complicated?

To rectify his error God Shiva severed the head of baby elephant and transplanted in onto his son who then become known as the Elephant headed god. His statues are usually found near river-sides where he is said to be looking for a bride resembling his mother! (There is a different version to this story which, for decency’s sake, cannot be printed here).

A recent report by the press trust of India stated that during the past three years more than 2,500 young boys and girls were sacrificed to goddess kali in India An AFP’s recent reports say: Hundreds of young boys and virgin girls are sacrificed every month for the deity Kali. In one case Rama Sewak hacked his eight year old son to death in broad daylight in Delhi becuase Godess Kali had told him he would come back to life and bring him good fortune. Blood-thirsty kali is worshipped opnely in the length and breadth of India.

Kali’s statue stands naked aside the inanimate body of the Hindu deity Siva, tongue stuck out with blood dripping from fang-like teeth. She holds a noose, a skull-topped staff, a blood-encrusted sword and a severed head. She is also known as Durga, Devi, Shaktima, Uma and Parvathi in manifestations.

We have been venerating krishna as our god. But with his actions he looks more of a womanizer than godly.
gopis: cow-herd girls; milk-maids; village girls; or better known as Lord Krsna’s girlfriends.

“In the first month of winter, the gopis of Nanda’s village performed a certain vow to the goddess Katyayani (Durga). They ate rice cooked with ghee; they bathed in the water of the Kalindi (Yamuna) River at sunrise; they made an image of the goddess out of sand and worshipped it with fragrant perfumes and garlands, with offerings and incense and lamps, and with bouquets of flowers, fresh sprigs of leaves, fruits, and rice. And they prayed: ‘Goddess Katyayani (Durga), great mistress of yoga, empress of great deluding magic, make the son of the cow-herd Nanda my husband. I bow to you.’ Saying this prayer, the girls would worship her, and having set their hearts on Krsna, the girls performed this vow for a month; they worshipped Bhadrakali (Durga) so that the son of Nanda (Krsna) would be their husband. Arising at dawn, calling one another by name, they would join hands and go to bathe in the Kalindi (Yamuna) every day, singing loudly about Krsna as they went. One day, when they had gone to the river and taken off their clothes on the bank as usual, they were playing joyfully in the water, singing about Krsna. The Lord Krsna, lord of all the masters of yoga, came there with his friends of the same age in order to grant them the object of their rites. He took their clothes and quickly climbed a Nipa tree, and laughing with the laughing boys he told what the joke was: ‘Girls, let each one of you come here and take her own clothes as she wishes. I promise you, this is no jest, for you have been exhausted by your vows. I have never before told an untruth, and these boys know this. Slender-waisted ones, come one by one or all together and take your clothes.’ When the gopis saw what his game was, they were overwhelmed with love, but they looked at one another in shame, and they smiled, but they did not come out. Flustered and embarrassed by Govinda’s (Krsna’s) words and by his jest, they sank down up to their necks in the icy water, and, shivering, they said to him, ‘You should not have played such a wicked trick. We know you as our beloved, son of the cow-herd Nanda, the pride of the village. Give us our clothes, for we are trembling. O darkly handsome one, we are your slaves and will do as you command, but you know dharma: give us our clothes or we will tell your father, the chieftain.’ The lord said to them, ‘If you are my slaves and will do as I command, then come here and take back your clothes, O brightly smiling ones.’ Then all the girls, shivering and smarting with cold, came out of the water, covering their crotches with their hands. The lord was pleased and gratified by their chaste actions, and he looked at them and placed their clothes on his shoulder and smiled and said, ‘Since you swam in the water without clothes while you were under a vow, this was an insult to the divinity (to Varuna, God of the waters). Therefore you must fold your hands and place them on your heads and bow low in expiation of your sin, and then you may take your clothes.’ When the village girls (gopis) heard what the infallible one said, they thought that bathing naked had been a violation of their vows, and they bowed down to Krsna, the very embodiment of all their rituals, who had thus fulfilled their desires and wiped out their disgrace and sin. Then the lord, the son of Devaki, gave their clothes to them, for he felt pity when he saw them bowed down in this way and he was satisfied with them. Though they were greatly deceived and robbed of their modesty, though they were mocked and treated like toys and stripped of their clothes, yet they held no grudge against him, for they were happy to be together with their beloved. Rejoicing in the closeness of their lover, they put on their clothes; their bashful glances, in the thrall of their hearts, did not move from him. Knowing that the girls had taken a vow because they desired to touch his feet, the lord with a rope around his waist said to the girls, ‘Good ladies, I know that your desire is to worship me. I rejoice in this vow, which deserves to be fulfilled. The desire of those whose hearts have been placed in me does not give rise to further desire, just as seed corn that has been boiled or fried does not give rise to seed. You have achieved your aim. Now, girls, go back to the village and you will enjoy your nights with me, for it was for this that you fine ladies undertook your vow and worship.’ When the gopis heard this from Krsna, they had obtained what they desired; and, meditating upon his lotus feet, they forced themselves to go away from him to the village.” — Srimad Bhagavatam 10:22:1-28. Compare: Brahmavaivarta Purana 1:27; Brhaddharma Purana 3:17.

Krishna misused his godliness to lure women.
Lord Krsna must be seriously lacking foresight to screw so many gopis, overpopulate the earth & then destroy his own family for weighing down the earth:

“Krsna became a householder (head of a household) in Dvaraka and married many wives, and had many sons and grandsons. In the race of the Yadus, no one was poor; everyone had many children, lived a long life, and respected Brahmins. But they were so numerous that one could not count them even in a hundred years. The terrible demons who had been slain in the battle of the gods and demons were born among men, and so at the command of Visnu the gods became incarnate in the race of Yadus to repress the demons…. When Krsna had killed the demons, and thus relieved the burden of the earth, he thought, ‘The earth is still overburdened by the unbearably burdensome race of the Yadus. No one else can overcome them, since they are under my protection.’ … Deluded by Krsna’s power of delusion, and cursed by the Brahmins, they were all destroyed, and when his entire family had been destroyed, Krsna said, ‘The burden has been removed.’ ” — Srimad Bhagavatam 10:90:27-44; 11:1:1-4; 11:30:1-25.

The need to exterminate the Yadus precisely because they are born of Krsna’s seed is made explicit in the Linga Purana:

“One of Krsna’s wives asked Krsna to give her a son equal to the lord of the gods. Krsna performed asceticism for Siva, who granted him a son, Samba. Krsna took sixteen thousand maidens for his pleasure, and then, under the pretext of the Brahmins’ curse, he destroyed his own family and lived in Prabhasa. After living for a hundred and one years in Dvaraka, where he had removed the sorrow of old age, he made the curse of the sages come true.” — Linga Purana 1:69:71, 82-84.

There is a common misconception among some Hindus that Lord Krsna had only one consort/wife, Radha, and these 16,000 gopis were just spiritual followers of this God. That is totally false. In fact, Lord Krsna got so many gopis & wives pregnant that he populated much of the earth with Yadus (Yadavas) and had to annihilate them later.


Samba’s mischief and that of the women combine here in one neat episode: he misbehaves with them. Thus the destruction of the race of the Yadus (Yadavas) is blamed on Krsna’s wives, on Krsna’s son, and on the rage of Krsna himself:

“One day Narada came to Dvaraka to see Krsna. All the Yadu boys received him with respect, but Samba, proud of his young beauty and deluded by the fated, inevitable force of the curse, disregarded Narada. To teach Samba a lesson, Narada told Krsna that all of Krsna’s sixteen thousand wives were in love with Samba. Samba (Krsna’s son) was summoned, and the women, whose minds were blurred by wine, showed unmistakable signs of passion when Samba appeared. Furious, Krsna cursed them to be carried off by barbarians after his death, and he cursed Samba to be afflicted with leprosy. Therefore the women were carried away under the very eyes of Arjuna. Later, Samba remembered what had happened before, and as he was impelled by inevitable fate, he enraged the sage Durvasas and prompted the curse that destroyed his whole family.” —

Samba Purana 3:6-55; Bhavisya Purana 1:72-73.

For those of you who questian The reason for 12 years delay for rama to get ready to bring back sita is written in ramayan itself.
just read ahead..


Raghava (not ‘Ravana’; Ravana is the demon) is another name for Lord Rama; Maithili is another name for Lord Rama’s wife Sita. Lord Rama, an Avatar (God-incarnate), is considered in Hinduism as the ideal & perfect husband and Sita as the ideal & perfect wife, as they are divine immortals (and now forever dwelling in heaven supposedly with the other Gods). So, what mortal humans could behave better than these supreme models, Lord Rama & Sita (or so the Hindus believe)? The following scene takes place in Yuddhakanda, the sixth book of the Valmiki Ramayana, after Sita has been carried off by the demon Ravana and won back, after many years of battle, by Rama, she is summoned to come to him at court:

“…. When Sita heard Rama speak in this way, her eyes which were as wide open as those of a doe filled with tears. But as Rama looked at her, his anger grew great once again, and he blazed like a fire into which great quantities of butter have been offered. He frowned and looked askance, and he spoke harshly to Sita in the midst of the monkeys and the Raksasas, saying, ‘I have done all that a man should do to wipe out an intolerable insult at the hands of an enemy. I won you, Sita, just as the great-souled sage Agastya won the unassailable southern realm for the world of living creatures, by means of his asceticism. But let it be known, if you please, that this great battle effort accomplished by means of the heroism of my friends was not undertaken by me for your sake. I protected my own reputation and expunged completely the scandal and degradation which had been cast upon my own famous family line. But as you stand before me, doubts have arisen about your behaviour, so that you are deeply offensive to me as a lamp to one whose eyes are diseased. Go then wherever you wish, in any direction, with my permission, daughter of Janaka. I can have nothing to do with you, good lady. What man of energy, born into a good family, could take back a woman who had lived in the house of another man, simply because his mind was so tortured by longing for her? Looking with a jaundiced eye upon you who have been degraded upon the lap of Ravana, how can I take you back when I boast of such an exalted family line? The purpose for which I won you back was to regain my own fame, since I have no attachment to you, and you may go from here as you wish. This is my pronouncement, now that I have applied my intelligence to the matter, good lady. Set your mind on Laksmana or Bharata or wherever you will be happy; set your heart on Sugriva the king of the monkeys or Vibhisana the king of the Raksasas, or wherever you will be happy, Sita. For when Ravana saw your captivating, divine body, he would not have held back for long when you were dwelling in his own house.’ When Maithili (Sita), who deserved to hear pleasant words, heard this unpleasant speech from her beloved after such a long time, she burst into tears and trembled violently like a clinging vine torn down by the trunk of a great elephant. As Raghava (Rama) spoke to her so angrily and harshly that her hair stood on end, the daughter of the king of Videha (Sita) was greatly agitated. When Maithili (Sita) heard the rough words of her husband, such as she had never heard before, spoken in the midst of a great crowd, she was deeply ashamed and embarrassed. The daughter of Janaka (Sita) shed torrents of tears which seemed to cause her limbs to shrink, as she was pierced by his words that were like arrows. Then she wiped her face that was wet with tears and spoke to her husband in gentle and faltering words, saying, ‘Why do you speak such rough words, cruel to the ears, inappropriate to me, O hero, like a common man to a common woman? I am not such as you believe, great-armed one. Have confidence in me; I swear to you that I have behaved properly. Because of the conduct of other individual women, you distrust the whole sex; but abandon this doubt, since you have tested me. If my person was touched, it was by force, my lord; I did not desire to do it, but fate brought about this offence. My heart, which is under my control, is ever attached to you; not being mistress of the situation, what could I do about my body which was in the control of someone else? If you who have given me honour still do not know me by the constantly growing affection of our intimate contact, then I am destroyed forever. O hero, why did you not discard me when you sent the hero Hanuman (Monkey-God) to look for me when I was on Lanka? I would have abandoned my life as soon as I heard the monkey deliver your message that you had discarded me. Then you would not have wasted all this effort, risking your life, nor would your friends have exhausted themselves fruitlessly like this. …’ As she spoke and wept, stammering in her tears, Sita said to Laksmana, who was standing there deep in sad thought, ‘Make a funeral pyre for me; that is the medicine for this calamity. … I cannot live; abandoned in an assembly of people by my husband, who is no longer pleased by my virtues, the only possible thing for me to do is to enter this.’ When Laksmana, the slayer of hostile enemies, heard what the daughter of Videha said, he was overcome by indignation, and he looked at Raghava’s face. But when he understood the wish of Rama’s heart as revealed by his gestures, the heroic Laksmana built the funeral pyre as Rama indicated. Then the daughter of Videha quietly and reverently walked around Rama, who stood with his head down, and she approached the blazing fire. Maithili (Sita) bowed to the divinities and to the brahmins, folded her palms, stood before the fire…. Then king Kubera the wide-famed, and Yama who wears away those who are hostile, and the thousand-eyed great Indra and Varuna who heats his enemies and the blessed three-eyed great God Siva who has the bull on his banner and Brahma the best of those who know the Vedas, maker of all people — all of these, the best of the thirty-three Gods, came together in their celestial chariots that shone like the sun, and they came to the city of Lanka and approached Raghava (Rama) and stretched forth their massive arms adorned with rings and said to Rama, who stood before them with his palms joined, ‘Maker of all people, best of the wise, how can you disregard Sita as she falls into the fire? How is it that you do not recognize yourself as the best of the bands of the Gods? Formerly you were the Vasu Rtadhaman, the progenitor of the Vasus; you are the Self-created, the first cause of the three worlds, the eighth Rudra of the Rudras, the fifth of the Sadhyas. Your two ears are the Asvins, your two eyes the sun and the moon. Heater of enemies, you are seen by all people at the beginning and at the end; yet you disregard the daughter of Videha as if you were a common man.’ When Raghava, Rama, the best of upholders of dharma, the master of the world, was thus addressed by the World-protectors, the best of the thirty-three Gods, he said to them, ‘I consider myself to be a man, Rama, the son of Dasaratha. O lord, tell me who I am, whose son, and where I come from.’ Then Brahma, the best of those who know the Vedas, said to Kakutstha, ‘Hear the truth from me, Rama, you who have truth as your valour. You are the God Narayana, the blessed Lord who carries four weapons (conch shell, discus, mace, and lotus, held in his four hands); you are the boar with one tusk, the conquerer of all forces in the past and in the future… Sita is Laksmi, and you are the God Visnu, Krsna, Prajapati. In order to slay Ravana, you entered into a mortal man’s body here, and you have completed this task for us, O best of those who uphold dharma.’ ” — Ramayana 6:117-19.

Lord Rama was looking out for his family’s honor & his reputation/public image, which is commendable of course; however, it is interesting to note that he admits to not even caring at all about Sita when she was kidnapped all those years. It is also interesting to note that although Sita’s intentions are good, and she has been faithful to Rama — only in her heart that is — unfortunately, it looks like she has been touched & ravished somewhat by the raksasa Ravana while on his lap on the way to Lanka, and Lord Rama feels that she is used & unchaste. Lord Rama did not even realize he was divine until it was revealed to him; perhaps this would account for why he was not aware that there was an easy solution to what he & some others may consider as Sita’s unchastity because according to some holy Hindu scriptures, a woman who has been unchaste can be purified & turned back into a virgin by having sex with Brahmins for thirteen months (Matsya Purana 70:40-60; cf. Mahabharata III:2:23.).

This is reply to those who say that ram was vegetarian.

Lord Rama laments to his mom (Kausalya) that he is going to be exiled from the palace at Ayodhya into the forest for fourteen years (because of his evil & selfish co-mom Kaikeyi’s plot), and he explains how he will be missing eating meat as he is so accustomed to at the palace:

“[Rama:] ‘I must to lonely wilds repair, abstain from flesh, and living there on roots, fruit, honey, hermit’s food, pass twice seven years (14 yrs.) in solitude. To Bharat’s hand the king will yield the regent power I thought to wield, and me, a hermit, will he send my days in Dandak wood to spend.’ ” — Ramayana 2:20.

Amazing. Lord Rama, a great, divine exemplar of dharma & virtue for Hindus, himself apparently doesn’t care much for vegetarianism & ahimsa.

Not only that, but some Brahmins & Ksatriyas ate five-clawed creatures. Five out of the five-clawed were allowed, that is. As the relatively innocent Vali is being murdered from ambush by Rama, he states:

“[Vali:] ‘Only five among the five-clawed creatures can be eaten by Brahmans and Ksatriyas, Raghava: the hedgehog, the porcupine, the lizard, the rabbit, and fifth, the turtle.’ ” — Ramayana 4:17:34.

A very similar injunction is found in the Vaisnava dharmasastra:

“If a man has (unawares) eaten meat of a five-toed animal, with the exception of the hare, the porcupine, the iguana, the rhinoceros, and the tortoise, he must fast for seven days.” — Visnusmrti 51:6.

Who knows, in addition to eating standard meats, perhaps both Rama & Sita also ate lizards, turtles, hedgehogs & porcupines.

For those who denigrate our animal gods here is the real reason we venerate them.
The Asvamedha yajna was a celebrated sacrifice in which many ancient Hindu queens & ksatriya women in various provinces had sex with a dead horse, and Lord Rama’s mom (Kausalya) & co-mom’s were no exception. Lord Rama’s mom spends a whole night having sex with a dead horse for the purpose of ‘righteousness & cleansing of sins’:

“The prescribed victims — snakes, birds, the horse, and aquatic animals — were bound at the place of immolation; each was dedicated to a specific divinity as is set forth in the ritual texts. The priests then bound them all to the posts in the manner set forth in the ritual texts. Three hundred beasts in addition to Dasaratha’s jewel of a horse were bound there to the sacrificial posts. Kausalya (Rama’s mom) walked reverently all around the horse and then with the greatest joy cut it with three knives. Her mind unwavering in her desire for righteousness, Kausalya (Rama’s mom) passed one night with the horse. The priests — the hotr, the adhvaryu, and the udgatr — saw to it that the second and the juniormost of the king’s wives, as well as his chief queen, were united with the horse. Then the officiating priest, who was extremely adept and held his senses in check, removed the fat of the horse and cooked it in the manner prescribed in the ritual texts. At the proper time and in accordance with the ritual prescriptions, the lord of men then sniffed the fragrance of the smoking fat, thereby freeing himself from sin. Then, acting in unison, the sixteen brahman officiating priests threw the limbs of the horse into the fire, in accordance with the ritual injunctions. In other sacrifices, the oblation is offered upon branches of the plaksa tree, but in the Horse Sacrifice alone the apportionment of the victim is made on a bed of reeds. The Horse Sacrifice is known as the Three-Day Rite; for both the kalpasutra and the brahmanas refer to the Horse Sacrifice as a rite lasting for three days.” — Ramayana 1:13:24-33.

At the end of this article, there is another excerpt of the Asvamedha sacrifice from the holy Vedas.

This is for women who say they are equal to men here is what Sri ram said.

Lord Rama is in harmonious agreement with Manusmrti 7:145-153. While lecturing his brother Bharata on how to govern the kingdom, Lord Rama says women are not trustworthy creatures:

“[Rama:] ‘Do you keep your womenfolk pacified? Are they duly protected by you? I hope you do not repose excessive faith in them and do not confide your secrets to them.’ ” — Ramayana 2:100.


Lord Rama’s brother Laxman (who, like Lord Rama, is considered to be incarnated from a portion of Lord Visnu & therefore divine) considers his sister-in-law Sita as well as women the world over as ‘flighty, sharp-tongued, divisive & perverse’ by nature. This scene takes place in the forest (after Lord Rama has been exiled) & a golden deer (actually, a raksasa in disguise) catches Sita’s attention. She asks Lord Rama to capture the deer & Rama instructs Laxman to guard Sita & not to leave her alone. Laxman had already suspected that the deer looked too perfect to be authentic, but Rama still went to kill the deer. The deer, becoming a raksasa, during battle with Rama yells in Rama’s voice calling for Laxman’s help; Sita tells Laxman to help Lord Rama. Laxman knows it must be a raksasa who was shouting and not really Rama & he says his brother commanded him not to leave Sita alone and he cannot disobey Rama’s orders.

And what is the very first accusation that comes out of Sita’s unchaste mouth?

“Then the daughter of Janaka (Sita) angrily said to him, ‘You wear the guise of a friend to your brother, Saumitri (Laksmana), but act like his foe, refusing to aid him in his extremity. You hope Rama perishes, Laksmana, isn’t that so? And it is all because of me. I think you would be happy should some disaster befall your brother. You have no real affection for him, so you stand there calmly with the splendid prince gone from sight. For with him in danger and me here, how could I prevent what you came here with the sole intention of doing?’ ” — Ramayana 3:43:5-8.

Laxman responds to Sita’s dirty accusations:

“[Laksmana:] ‘Rama cannot be killed in battle. You must not talk this way, for I dare not leave you in the forest with Raghava (Rama) gone. … Let your heart rest easy, do not be alarmed. Your husband will soon return, after killing that splendid deer. That was clearly not his voice, or any belonging to a god. It was the magic of that raksasa, unreal as a mirage. You were entrusted to my safekeeping, shapely Vaidehi (Sita), by the great Rama. I dare not leave you here alone. Then too, dear lady, because of the slaughter at Janasthana, where Khara perished, we have earned the hostility of the night-stalkers. Raksasas delight in causing trouble, Vaidehi (Sita), they make all kinds of noises in the deep forest. You need not worry.’ ” — Ramayana 3:43:12-18.

By the way, as shown in Laxman’s quote above, he refers to his sister-in-law Sita as ’shapely.’ There is a lot of shapely & voluptuous language in the Valmiki Ramayana; Sita is referred to as ’shapely’ or ‘fair-hipped’ perhaps more often than she is referred to as ‘chaste.’ Incidently, in the first book of the Ramayana (Balakanda), Lord Indra calls Gautama’s wife Ahalya ‘fair-hipped’ & ’shapely’ as well (after he rapes her in the disguise of her husband Gautama).

Back to the topic… So after Lord Rama’s brother (Laxman) tells Sita he cannot disregard his brother’s stringent instructions against leaving her alone in the perilous forest, Sita opens her polluted mouth, accusing him again:

“Though what he said was true, Sita was enraged by Laksmana’s words. Her eyes blazed bright red as she made this harsh reply: ‘Ignoble, cruel man, disgrace to your House! How pitiful this attempt of yours. I feel certain you are pleased with all this, and that is why you can talk the way you do. It is nothing new, Laksmana, for rivals to be so evil, cruel rivals like you always plotting in secret. You treacherously followed Rama to the forest, the two of you alone: You are either in the employ of Bharata or secretly plotting to get me.’ ” — Ramayana 3:43:19-22.

With Sita repeatedly growling such filthy allegations against Lord Rama’s brother Laxman, no doubt, some people may ask the question: Has Sita always been loyal to Lord Rama…Or at one point was she sucking so many other guys’ lingas that adulterous language ended up clinging to her tongue?

Here is how Laxman responds to the howling Sita:

“[Laksmana:] ‘This is the nature of women the whole world over: Women care nothing for righteousness, they are flighty, sharp-tongued, and divisive. May all the inhabitants of the forest give ear and bear me witness how my words of reason met so harsh a reply from you. Curse you and be damned, that you could so suspect me, when I am only following the orders of my guru. How like a woman to be so perverse! I am going to Kakutstha (Rama). I wish you well, fair woman. May the spirits of the forest, each and every one, protect you, large-eyed lady. How ominous the portents that manifest themselves to me! I pray I find you here when I return with Rama.’ ” — Ramayana 3:43:27-31.

Sita again falls victim to her own stupidity; while Laxman searches for Lord Rama, the raksasa-king Ravana (who had contrived this whole trap) kidnaps the ‘flighty, sharp-tongued, divisive, perverse’ Sita. Lord Rama, Laxman, Sita & Hanuman (the Monkey-warrior God) are all worshipped by Hindus; however, regarding the language of these ‘deities’ at times, one would be hard-pressed to even remotely consider their nonsense as divine speech.

Caste (varna): Brahmin = Priest Caste; Ksatriya = Rajanya/Ruler/Warrior Caste; Vaisya = Commoner Caste; Sudra = Servant/Slave Caste; and Avarna = Outcaste/Untouchable/Dalit/Candala/Dog-eater. There are also many subsets in each caste. Dvija = twice-born (twice-born = upper 3 castes or sometimes just Brahmin caste particularly). Some Hindus have a delusion that caste is not promoted by any of their holy books. Is that really so? Let’s find out:

“By his very birth a Brahmin is a deity even for the gods and the only authority for people in this world, for the Veda is the foundation in this matter.” — Manusmrti 11:85.

“People here whose behaviour is pleasant can expect to enter a pleasant womb, like that of a woman of the Brahmin, the Ksatriya, or the Vaisya caste. But people of foul behaviour can expect to enter the foul womb, like that of a dog, a pig, or an outcaste woman.” — Chandogya Upanisad 5:10:7.

“If a man of one birth (Sudra) hurls cruel words at one of the twice-born, his tongue should be cut out, for he was born from the rear-end. If he mentions their name or caste maliciously, a red-hot iron nail ten-fingers long should be thrust into his mouth. If he is so proud as to instruct priests about their duty, the king should have hot oil poured into his mouth and ears.” — Manusmrti 8:270-272.

“If a man of inferior caste tries to sit down on the same seat as a man of superior caste, he should be branded on the hip and banished, or have his buttocks cut off.” — Manusmrti 8:281.

“If in the process of negotiating betrothal there are first ten suitors of the non-Brahmana varna for a woman (the marriageable girl), all of them lose their claims of marriage and, only the Brahmin, the learned one, if he grasps her hand would be her husband and only he. Not even the man of Ksatriya varna and not even the man of Vaisya varna but only the Brahmin is the husband of the bride in such cases of claimants of betrothal, and the sun, as it appears, revealing this fact to the people of five classes (4 varnas and the fifth avarna) rises up.” — Atharva Veda 5:17:8-9.

“If someone born in a Ksatriya, Vaisya, or Sudra womb should be unable to pay his fine, he may absolve himself of the debt by labour; a Brahmin should pay little by little. The king should have women, children, madmen, and the old, the poor, and the ill chastised with a whip, a bamboo cane, a rope, and so forth.” — Manusmrti 9:229-230.

“The Sudra’s duty and supreme good is nothing but obedience to famous Brahmin householders who know the Veda. If he is unpolluted, obedient to his superiors, gentle in his speech, without a sense of ‘I’, and always dependent on the Brahmins and the other (twice-born castes), he attains a superior birth (in the next life).” — Manusmrti 9:334-335.

“…thereby the Ksatriya, whenever he likes, says, ‘Hello Vaisya, just bring to me what you have stored away!’ Thus he both subdues him and obtains possession of anything he wishes by dint of this very energy.” — Satapatha Brahmana 1:3:2:15.

“One-fourth of (the punishment for) Brahmin-killing is traditionally regarded as (the punishment) for the killing of a Ksatriya, one-eighth for (killing) a Vaisya, and it should be one-sixteenth for (killing) a Sudra who knows his place.” — Manusmrti 11:127.

“A Brahmin is a great deity whether or not he is learned, just as fire is a great deity whether or not it is brought to the altar. The purifying fire with its brilliant energy is not defiled even in cremation grounds, and when oblations of butter are placed in it at sacrifices it grows even greater. Thus Brahmins should be revered in every way, even if they engage in all kinds of undesirable actions, for this is the supreme deity. If the Ksatriyas become overbearing towards the Brahmins in any way, the Brahmins themselves should subdue them, for the Ksatriyas were born from the Brahmins.” — Manusmrti 9:317-320.

“A Ksatriya in adversity may also make a living by all of these (means); but he should never be so proud as to assume the livelihood of his betters. If a man of the lowest caste should, through greed, make his living by the innate activities of his superiors, the king should confiscate his wealth and banish him immediately. One’s own duty, (even) without any good qualities, is better than someone else’s duty well done; for a man who makes his living by someone else’s duty immediately falls from (his own) caste.” — Manusmrti 10:95-97.

“With whatever limb an inferior insults or hurts his superior in caste, of that limb the king shall cause him to be deprived. If he places himself on the same seat with his superior, he shall be banished with a mark on his buttocks. If he spits on him, he shall lose both lips; If he breaks wind against him, his hindparts; If he uses abusive language, his tongue. If a (lowborn) man through pride gives instruction (to a member of the highest caste) concerning his duty, let the king order hot oil to be dropped into his mouth. If a (low-born man) mentions the name or caste of a superior revilingly, an iron pin, ten inches long, shall be thrust into his mouth (red hot).” — Visnusmrti 5:19-25.

“His (Purusa’s) mouth became the Brahmin; his arms were made into the Ksatriya, his thighs the Vaisya, and from his feet the Sudra was born.” — Rig Veda 10:90:12.

In comparison, Sudras are as low as feet & Outcastes (avarna) are even below that status of course.



“Candalas must live out of the town, and their clothes must be the mantles of the deceased.” — Visnusmrti 16:14.

“These (castes) should live near mounds, trees, and cremation-grounds, in mountains and in groves, recognizable and making a living by their own innate activities. But the dwellings of ‘Fierce’ Untouchables (candala) and ‘Dog-cookers’ (svapaca) should be outside the village; they must use discarded bowls, and dogs and donkeys should be their wealth. Their clothing should be the clothes of the dead, and their food should be in broken dishes; their ornaments should be made of black iron, and they should wander constantly. A man who carries out his duties should not seek contact with them; they should do business with one another and marry with those who are like them. Their food, dependent upon others, should be given to them in a broken dish, and they should not walk about in villages and cities at night.” — Manusmrti 10:50-54.

“If one who (being a member of the Candala or some other outcaste) must not be touched, intentionally defiles by his touch one who (as a member of a twice-born caste) may be touched (by other twice-born persons only), he (or she) shall be put to death. If a woman in her courses (touches such a person), she shall be lashed with a whip.” — Visnusmrti 5:104-5.

There is ample justification in the Gita alone to maintain caste divisions & oppressions; here are Lord Krsna’s words:

“It is far better to perform one’s svadharma (prescribed duties), even though faultily, than another’s duties perfectly. Destruction in the course of performing one’s own duty is better than engaging in another’s duties, for to follow another’s path is dangerous.” — Bhagavad-Gita 3:35.

“According to the three modes of material nature (goodness, passion, ignorance) and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society (Brahmin/Ksatriya/Vaisya/Sudra) are created by Me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the nondoer, being unchangeable.” — Bhagavad-Gita 4:13.

“It is better to engage in one’s own svadharma (occupation), even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another’s occupation and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one’s nature are never affected by sinful reactions.” — Bhagavad-Gita 18:47.

Lord Rama (who, like Lord Krsna, is an Avatar of Lord Visnu) would be in complete accord with the above quotes; afterall, he killed an innocent Sudra, Sambuka, only because he was performing austerities which were not prescribed duties for low-castes (ref. Ramayana 7:88-89).

Women & Sudras (& outcastes) are not allowed to study the Vedas; this is one reason this “God” Siva is denounced for allowing a Sudra the Vedic teachings. Daksa’s curse is as follows:

“The Brahmins will not sacrifice to you along with the other gods, for Siva has defiled the path followed by good men; he is impure, an abolisher of rites and demolisher of barriers, [who gives] the word of the Vedas to a Sudra. He wanders like a madman, naked, laughing, the lord of ghosts, evil-hearted. Let Siva, the lowest of the gods, obtain no share with Indra and Visnu at the sacrifice; let all the followers of Siva be heretics, opponents of the true scriptures, following the heresy whose god is the king of ghosts.” — Brahma Purana 2:13:70-73; Garuda Purana 6:19; Bhagavata Purana 4:2:10-32.

In Hinduism, it is understood that women cannot sacrifice or conduct official yajnas (nor become priests of course) because a male relative is required. However, the unfortunate news is that Hindu Gods do not talk to those detested things called ‘low-castes’ either:

“Now the gods do not commune with everyone, but only with a Brahmin, or a Rajanya (Ksatriya), or a Vaisya; for these are able to sacrifice. Should there be occasion for him to converse with a Sudra, let him say to one of those, ‘Tell this one so and so! Tell this one so and so!’ This is the rule of conduct for the consecrated in such a case.” — Satapatha Brahmana 3:1:1:10.

Low-castes do not need to despair; Hindu scriptures are utterly ruthless in degrading almost anyone who is Hindu (mortal or divine). Perhaps Brahmins are the exception to the rule though (not women of Brahmins however).

According to the timeless Visnusmrti, only the twice-born caste wives (Brahmin wives, Ksatriya wives & Vaisya wives) of a twice-born man, but not the Sudra wife, are allowed to serve the guests during the sacrifice. He (and she) will be barred from entering heaven if he permits a low caste wife to offer such hospitalities:

“A union of a twice-born man with a Sudra wife can never produce religious merit; it is from carnal desire only that he marries her, being blinded by lust. Men of the three first castes, who through folly marry a woman of the lowest caste, quickly degrade their families and progeny to the state of Sudras. If his oblations to the gods and manes and (his hospitable attentions) to guests are offered principally through her (a Sudra wife’s) hands, the gods and manes (and the guests) will not eat such offerings, and he will not go to heaven.” — Visnusmrti 26:5-7.

Women are mere objects in our hinduism because


Hinduism’s holy dharmasastra teaches that women are like whores and sluts by nature like the bimbo goddess Indrani (ref. RigVeda 10:86:6.):

“Good looks do not matter to them, nor do they care about youth; ‘A man!’ they say, and enjoy sex with him, whether he is good-looking or ugly. By running after men like whores, by their fickle minds, and by their natural lack of affection these women are unfaithful to their husbands even when they are zealously guarded here. Knowing that their very own nature is like this, as it was born at the creation by the Lord of Creatures (Prajapati), a man should make the utmost effort to guard them. The bed and the seat, jewellery, lust, anger, crookedness, a malicious nature, and bad conduct are what Manu assigned to women. There is no ritual with Vedic verses for women; this is a firmly established point of law. For women, who have no virile strength, and no Vedic verses, are falsehood; this is well established.” — Manusmrti 9:14-18.

Lord Siva seduces the Pine Forest sages’ wives and is cursed for this immoral behavior. Origin of the holy Linga which is commonly worshipped in Hindu temples:

“When the sages saw Siva naked and excited they beat him and they said, ‘Tear out your linga.’ The great yogi said to them, ‘I will do it, if you hate my linga’, and he tore it out and vanished.” — Kurma Purana 2:38:39-41; cf. Haracaritacintamani 10:74; Yagisvaramahatmya 26a. 14.

In another version, the sages in the forest quote the legal texts regarding the penalty for seducing a guru’s wife when they punish Siva:

“You false ascetic, let your (Siva’s) linga fall to earth here. A shameless and evil man who has seduced another man’s wife should be castrated; there is no other punishment ever. A man who has seduced his guru’s wife should cut off the linga and testicles himself and hold them in his hands and walk until he dies.” — Siva Purana, Dharmasamhita 10:187-90; cf. B. K. Sarkar, pp.234-5.

Here is another origin of the holy Linga:

“… He (Siva) agreed to this and laughed, for he was secretly amused, and he said to Brahma, ‘There is no good use for this linga except for the creation of progeny.’ And as he said this he broke it off and threw it upon the surface of the earth. The linga broke through the earth down to the subterranean hell and went to the very sky. Visnu sought the end of it below, and Brahma flew upwards, but they did not find the end of it, for all their vital effort. Then a voice arose out of the sky as the two of them sat there, and it said, ‘If the linga of the god with braided hair is worshipped, it will certainly grant all desires that are longed for in the heart.’ When Brahma and Visnu heard this, they and all the divinities worshipped the linga with devotion, with their hearts set upon Rudra (Siva).” — Siva Purana, Dharmasamhita 49:23b-46, 74-86.

To all who oppose hinduism on ground that we donot have concept of sin.
We may not have a concept of sin but cursing for doing wrong with fault or without has been in our scriptures for long. Just look at this example and see for yourselves why children get re-birth to same parents.


“When the gods interrupted Siva and Parvati, two sons were born of drops of Siva’s seed. These sons were then posted at the door to prevent further interruptions while Siva made love to Parvati, having promised the gods that he would not spill his seed in her. One day Parvati came out of the bedroom in great dishabille, half naked, her breasts scored with teeth marks. The two sons chanced to see her like that, and they were upset, but Parvati became angry and said, ‘Why have you looked at me when I was not in a state to be seen by anyone but my husband? You should have closed your eyes. Since you have done this immoral thing, you will be reborn as mortal men with the faces of monkeys.’ Then they were miserable and protested that it was her fault for having come out so suddenly, and they cursed her to become a mortal queen (Taravati) and Siva to be her husband (Candrasekhara) so that they themselves might be born again as their sons, Vetala and Bhairava.” — Siva Purana 3:21:1-8; Kalika Purana 49:1-92, 50:1-64, 51:1-60, 52:1-155, 53:1-217.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)