Alia Bhatt's New Bridal Wear Ad Sparks Controversy - Page 25

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

🤣

Do you mean to be sarcastic or was that unintentionally funny 🤣

Nope, not even a shred of sarcasm there.

I have never seen such strotas for a bride where she is told to use her knowledge of education in her life.

Every other text we read on a bride is all about ‘How to’s at your husband place.

It just proves very well that the importance of education was inline in Hindus for ages, irrespective of gender.

O bride! May the knowledge of the Vedas be in front of you and behind you, in your centre and in your ends. May you conduct your life after attaining the knowledge of the Vedas. May you be benevolent, the harbinger of good fortune and health and live in great dignity and indeed be illumined in your husband’s home.” Atharva Veda 14-1-64.

Originally posted by: monu_tan

Nope, not even a shred of sarcasm there.

I have never seen such strotas for a bride where she is told to use her knowledge of education in her life.

Every other text we read on a bride is all about ‘How to’s at your husband place.

It just proves very well that the importance of education was inline in Hindus for ages, irrespective of gender.

O bride! May the knowledge of the Vedas be in front of you and behind you, in your centre and in your ends. May you conduct your life after attaining the knowledge of the Vedas. May you be benevolent, the harbinger of good fortune and health and live in great dignity and indeed be illumined in your husband’s home.” Atharva Veda 14-1-64.

Well, I doubt the education cited had much to do with the sciences. Women obviously lived restricted lives.

I'm not very sure - but are there any famous women authors or of anything of the sort from ancient India?

To me the text in bold sounds more like the rules and duties that are prescribed by the Vedas that may be restrictive in nature for both men and women.

While I love the knowledge of the Upanishads and Hindu texts like the Bhagwat Gita. The Vedas I feel are limited sources of knowledge are supposed to bind us and restrict humans and be tied to the karm kand of this world rather than free us of it. (I'm reminded of BK Modi's Buddha.. there was a scene that touched me particularly.. that some of these traditions and rituals are like being tied on a cliff.. agar in bandhono ko kaat diya jaaye.. toh khayi ain gir jaoge.. agar nahi katoge, toh latke rahoge).

Education has different connotations and lets not forget that knowledge itself was always restricted based on their roles prescribed by the society. Like, Karna got hell for being a Shudra but its somehow alright because he had Kshatriya blood in him. Same for women.. are there any examples that show us otherwise?

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

Well, I doubt the education cited had much to do with the sciences. Women obviously lived restricted lives.

I'm not very sure - but are there any famous women authors or of anything of the sort from ancient India?

To me the text in bold sounds more like the rules and duties that are prescribed by the Vedas that may be restrictive in nature for both men and women.

While I love the knowledge of the Upanishads and Hindu texts like the Bhagwat Gita. The Vedas I feel are limited sources of knowledge are supposed to bind us and restrict humans and be tied to the karm kand of this world rather than free us of it. (I'm reminded of BK Modi's Buddha.. there was a scene that touched me particularly.. that some of these traditions and rituals are like being tied on a cliff.. agar in bandhono ko kaat diya jaaye.. toh khayi ain gir jaoge.. agar nahi katoge, toh latke rahoge).

Education has different connotations and lets not forget that knowledge itself was always restricted based on their roles prescribed by the society. Like, Karna got hell for being a Shudra but its somehow alright because he had Kshatriya blood in him. Same for women.. are there any examples that show us otherwise?

There are a number of vedas and they are certainly not restricted to Karm kand of people.

Upanishads are also part of Vedas as each Veda had multiple subsections.

While I leave it to you to know the kind and types of Vedas, but it did encompass language, astrology, Ayurveda, music, fine arts , special skills etc. And it’s the same for both men and women as these were orally recited srutis.

Vedas have excellent example of woman orators, warriors, artists, courtiers , teachers. Not one but multiple. The problem is we haven’t studied vedas, Puranas etc and it’s no more part of a normal Hindu lives.

strīśūdra dvijabandhunāṃ trayī na śrūtigocarā

iti bhāratamākhyānaṃ muninā kṛpayākṛtaṃ.

Puran script.

Vedas were not restricted to upper caste or one gender. The above strota talks about it being open to stri as well as sudra as everyone has right to gain knowledge.

Caste system was not the way we know now. So won’t even go there.

🤪

https://www.instagram.com/p/CUFCN9Vs8vg/?utm_medium=copy_link

Originally posted by: MommaDarling

🤪

https://www.instagram.com/p/CUFCN9Vs8vg/?utm_medium=copy_link

It looks like she was lurking in this topic to make notes 👀

Originally posted by: monu_tan

There are a number of vedas and they are certainly not restricted to Karm kand of people.

Upanishads are also part of Vedas as each Veda had multiple subsections.

While I leave it to you to know the kind and types of Vedas, but it did encompass language, astrology, Ayurveda, music, fine arts , special skills etc. And it’s the same for both men and women as these were orally recited srutis.

Vedas have excellent example of woman orators, warriors, artists, courtiers , teachers. Not one but multiple. The problem is we haven’t studied vedas, Puranas etc and it’s no more part of a normal Hindu lives.

strīśūdra dvijabandhunāṃ trayī na śrūtigocarā

iti bhāratamākhyānaṃ muninā kṛpayākṛtaṃ.

Puran script.

Vedas were not restricted to upper caste or one gender. The above strota talks about it being open to stri as well as sudra as everyone has right to gain knowledge.

Caste system was not the way we know now. So won’t even go there.

I don’t claim to be an expert on vedas, but I do have some basic knowledge though and I do know it covers a variety of subject. I had study them a bit as I went to Arya Samaj school for a while.. but I really haven’t come across any prominent women authors etc. vedas only contain knowledge.. that’s all and they don’t stretch beyond Brahmand ( Lord Rama, Lord Krishna & Gautam Buddha are actually par brahm and that’s a higher region) and doesn’t explain it well, it’s just leaves it that it’s boundless. The region is still material and Mayadesh so the knowledge therefore stands limited.. because full consciousness can’t be contained from it. Saints like Kabir and Tulsi Sahib have called the knowledge incomplete.. it’s obviously karm kand. Astrology, customs and traditions are actually meant to trap. Meera Bai broke away from the traditions & reached a higher state of consciousness - only love, Bhakti and devotion matter there..

The upanishads are more of an extension of it answering more philosophical questions..

Even in Mahabharat times Karna had to lie to get knowledge.. so how is it different?

Gautam Buddha walked the earth approximately 2500 years back.. it was prominent then. That’s quite ancient if you ask me..

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Oh, my mistake. I thought you said I claimed there was no ill treatment of women in Christianity.

Nope. Jesus said he came to uphold the law, which he summarized as love God and love your fellow man. And he explicitly said there is no diff between man and woman in the eye of God. His interactions with women regarded as impure is beautiful to read.

Law on interacting with impure women is pretty clear in Jewish law. He stopped it from happening. So there you go. Opposition.

Opposition to Sabbath laws.

Opposition to dietary laws.

I don't particularly want to post this here, but you keep claiming something patently wrong, so forced to.

Mathew 23, 13:31

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. [3]15

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.16

"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, `If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'17

You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred?18

You also say, `If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.'19

You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred?20

Therefore, he who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it.21

And he who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it.22

And he who swears by heaven swears by God's throne and by the one who sits on it.23

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices--mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law--justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.24

You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.25

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.26

Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.27

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean.28

In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.29

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous.30

And you say, `If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.'31

So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets.32

Fill up, then, the measure of the sin of your forefathers!33

"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?34

-----

Yeah, Jesus did live and die as a Jew. His followers didn't start Christianity, either. That started as a sect of Judaism. Emperor Constantine did that.

Where does Jesus say there is no difference between man and woman in the eyes of god?

How do any of these verses contradict my point? Regarding his opposition, I'll need to read up on it further, but from what I recall, he doesn't actually oppose the sabbath laws but the interpretation of it, and Christians do not see him as opposing the sabbath law, that would make Jesus a sinner.

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17_

Where does Jesus say there is no difference between man and woman in the eyes of god?

How do any of these verses contradict my point? Regarding his opposition, I'll need to read up on it further, but from what I recall, he doesn't actually oppose the sabbath laws but the interpretation of it, and Christians do not see him as opposing the sabbath law, that would make Jesus a sinner.

That sounds complicated…

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

And @H as for your claim about Jesus never repudiation Jewish law.

John 8, 1 to 11

4 “Teacher,” they said to Jesus, “this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 The law of Moses says to stone her. What do you say?”

6 They were trying to trap him into saying something they could use against him, but Jesus stooped down and wrote in the dust with his finger. 7 They kept demanding an answer, so he stood up again and said, “All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!” 8 Then he stooped down again and wrote in the dust.

9 When the accusers heard this, they slipped away one by one, beginning with the oldest, until only Jesus was left in the middle of the crowd with the woman. 10 Then Jesus stood up again and said to the woman, “Where are your accusers? Didn’t even one of them condemn you?”

11 “No, Lord,” she said.

And Jesus said, “Neither do I. Go and sin no more.”

Nice story, completely ahistorical, not surprised it only occurs in John, and not in the three earlier gospels.

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17_

Nice story, completely ahistorical, not surprised it only occurs in John, and not in the three earlier gospels.

😆 nice try.

those were written by contemporaries of Jesus..

And yeah, John and Mathew were actually apostles. Luke and Mark were not.

Mary Magdalene is mentioned in all 4 gospels. There is also a gospel by her which the church did not include in the Bible.

You were proven wrong. That's it. Now you're trying to spin hard.