'Padmaavat is pure misogyny dressed up in diamonds and drama' Barkha D - Page 14

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

Quran is not just a religious book. It is also the documentation of what was practiced in that (medieval) era, in those (European and Middle East) cultures. Not like, those rulers followed Quran. Instead, Quran just documented what they used to do (and may have granted religious sanctions within limitations).

On the question; women's right to live over "dying for their honour".

Why don't we extend these to men as well?

Don't men have right to live? Why should a Rajput man die, fighting for his kingdom (when he sees no chance of winning)? What is so honourable if someone dies in battlefield?

Even today, why do we honour our dead soldiers as martyrs? Why do we mock at someone who fled the battlefield? Doesn't he has the right to live?

We did not live then. Let us stop being judgemental.

Originally posted by: phillaur.i

When will people stop talking of this movie

Originally posted by: sunflower52

Where are you getting this information about Quran, I am just flabbergasted. That book is not a history book but more, it's about how one should live in this world and about God etc.

That's because on a battlefield there is no room to show cowardice, showing your back & running away is sign of a coward not bravery. Not everyone has a guts to give up their lives for a cause that is why they are revered.

Originally posted by: ZanduBaaM

AB tak chal raha hai yeh thread itna to Barkha ka Journlisam bhi nahi chal raha aaj kal😛🤣

in logo ka sahi hai Jab movie release na hui to FOE hurt ho gaya

ab movie release ke baad feminism...

accha hai isne movie like nahi ki varna dusre din theater se utar jaati ... 😉

Originally posted by: Cookies..

I'm curious to know from where you came up with this conclusion and then stated it as if it's a fact. The Quran is NOT a documentation of history. It is NOT a history book where we go and read about what people did in medieval times. It's a way of life. It's a book guiding us about how we should live our lives righteously. It tells us how to differentiate right from wrong and the importance of God in our lives.

You are completely free to believe what you choose and have an opinion on a topic but the fact that you went ahead to make such a statement without actually reading the book is sort of disrespectful.

I won't go too much into India's history as I'm not educated on it enough to really say much but I think bringing religion is not tasteful.

P.S. Nothing personal. I'm just pointing out this particular post. That's all. I'll leave this topic now.

Originally posted by: angrybread

I was also curious to know as to where did quran as history book came up from (I don't even know what quran is actually doing in a topic about padmavati in the 1st place 😕) Problem is not in opinion but problem is the way they are presented as a fact without any knowledge whatsoever..as i said before too if one genuinely wants to know the real meaning and facts then internet is the last place one should be looking . As far as comparison with criticism of Hinduism or other religion goes then if i criticize manusmriti ( as flip-flop said ) then i wouldn't get the same treatment as someone from Hinduism will get ( even thought its open for criticism as per flip-flop) and same goes other way too about other religions so it's not a fair to compare people's reactions as per your own experience.

Originally posted by: flipfl0p

That is the problem with irreligious people. Even after taking all precaution not to offend a believer's sentiment, we never know how we hurt some, unintentionally. I have faced it when I made fun of Hindu Gods too. (Though making fun of them is allowed in Hinduism).

I don't know, how I could have phrased it better. May be, some rationalist Muslim can help me there. But my intention is clear. So I am not going to take back my words.

I admit. I have not read Quran or Hadith in a proper way. I read few verses and their interpretations in internet. I don't consider that as a proper knowledge. I just read them when someone was attacking Hinduism based on ManuSmriti (which was again based on internet knowledge). My intention there was to prove, such verses can exist in every book written in that era.

I am not going to mention the link or quote those lines. My intention is not, this v/s that.

I have read Gita. (Even that speaks about God, how to lead our lives etc). But I am not spiritually inclined. I have read it as a nonbeliever, to understand social dynamics of that time. To me, these books are as charming to a nonbeliever as much to a believer. I extended the same thing to Quran. I am not concerned whether the lines, "Your right hand possess" really refers to slaves or not. My point is, even if they, we have to consider the era and the background culture in which these lines are written.

In India we have right wing historians, who accuse of "Islamic Invasion" ruining India's heritage. They quote certain verses. We also have left wing apologists, who portray as if the invasion was the best thing that happened to India. (It protected India from Mangol's invasion. It freed people who were bound by castes,... etc).

I don't have any inclination of siding with any.

I don't agree with Right, when they say it as Islamic invasion. The invaders happened to be Muslims. They did what they did, as it was not considered wrong in their culture. (Not because of a book). I don't agree with Left when they say, they were our saviours. They were as ruthless as any other expansionists like Genghis Khan.

On Red. If Padmavati was not fictional, if she was alive, she would have said the same thing to Barkha.