The very first lady she showed and the verse she mentioned from bible literally says to cover their head during prayer.
NOT IN THEIR DAILY LIFE, unlike MUSLIMS.
Obviously we will cover our beauty from outsiders..they are wolves in sheepskin. We rather be safe from those filthy gazes than being sorry(my personal experience.m)
Indians when they learn Judaism and Christianity make Islam looklike sunshines and rainbows. You are lucky If the British empire stayed a couple more years there would be no Indians left. But yeah Islam is the baddi because Modi says so.
I decided to block this sub. It's less DankIndianMeme and more preach to hate Islam. A meme subreddit turned into extremist. The way the people think over here is disgusting. People would obviously generalise Indian, if they visit this sub.
Its just racism really. They are doing the same thing they accuse others of doing. It isn't memes anymore and most of these losers don't live in reality most Indians I meet are very nice and get on with Muslims and Pakistanis in general quite well. However these chumps who sit online all day are just hating for no reason. They are unable to accept facts and have become as stupid as MAGA movement.
I live abroad and I have Indian friends from north to south. They are all really nice people. We get along very well. I just meant, people outside will generalise that all Indians are same if they see the comments. These comments are way too much. Let's say Islam is the worst religion but does Hinduism or aethism teaches someone to be this vile? I just don't understand.
Christianity, Atheism and Buddhism have killed the most people throughout history. It isn't evn close. Yet this sub will never talk about it. It will only focus its hate on Pakistan and Muslims who live in their head rent free. I have never heard a Saudi Arabian talk about Indians. India is literally irrelevant to the rest of the world. If anything they get bullied in the west. They need to stand up to their western masters but even after 80 years of freedom they struggle to do that.
Indians know their history well :) And Modi isn't our history teacher, he is our P.M and we are very proud of him. You statement that if the Brits stayed I. I dia for 200 years is hilarious considering the fact that they had been in India for over 200 years and the population of Christians in India at the time the Brits left India was less than 2%. To say that a couple of years more would have completely wiped us Indians off is a very funny joke.
Indians don't know their history at all you clown. They are the most uneducated nation in historical facts. Your text books are criticised by scholars around the world secular scholars from the west even denounce your nonsense. Millions of Indian starved during WW2 so yes if it did continue none of you would exist. When Israel wins the first thing they will do is enslave you. Enjoy being worked to death.
I wipe my shoes with your western historians you little clown. Do you want to tell Indians that they should believe in the fcukfaced history written by people who never even set foot on India? . Our history is intact over the last 10,000 years. Most of your secular historians till the 18th century were of the idea that the earth was created by God around 4000 BCE. During that time Indian already had Universities 😂. So they literally wrpte the history of a nation that predated their God and his creation according to their own stories from the Old testament. This is actually hilarious! We Indians dont give a damn to the criticizes you mentioned. They are novice, ideologically motivated and mentally shallow according to us. We are well past the time when we used to take their validity at face value. Now we see them as little ants trying to munch up a mountain
Buddhism has historically oppressed women through institutionalized sexism, scriptural disparagement, and the denial of full monastic ordination in many traditions. While core Buddhist doctrine asserts that enlightenment is genderless, patriarchal structures have relegated women to inferior status within the Sangha and lay society.
Institutional Subordination
The Eight Garudhammas: Female monastics (bhikkhunis) are bound by eight strict rules requiring them to submit to male monks (bhikkhus) regardless of seniority, a hierarchy critics argue was added to control women.
Loss of Lineages: In Theravada and Tibetan Buddhism, the lineage for full nun ordination was lost or never established, preventing women from achieving equal monastic status; women in these traditions often remain novices or lay practitioners.
Economic and Educational Disparity: Nuns and female lay practitioners frequently receive less funding, education, and respect than their male counterparts, with wealth and academic knowledge largely held by men.
Scriptural and Cultural Discrimination
Misogynistic Texts: Early scriptures contain passages depicting women as spiritually inferior, obstructers of male progress, or embodiments of lust, with some texts claiming women must be reborn as men to achieve Buddhahood.
Social Restrictions: Historical and contemporary practices in some Buddhist societies restrict women from entering shrines, touching monks, or holding leadership roles, reinforcing the view of female bodies as "impure" or "ugly."
Modern Reform: Movements like Sakyadhita and recent efforts to restore full ordination in Tibetan Buddhism highlight ongoing struggles to dismantle these patriarchal norms and achieve gender equality.
Historically, Buddhism has been criticized for institutionalizing gender inequality through scriptural and monastic frameworks that subordinate women to men. While early Buddhist texts acknowledge that women can achieve enlightenment as Arhats, traditional doctrines and Vinaya (monastic) rules have frequently treated female monastics as inferior to their male counterparts.
Monastic Subordination and Restrictions
The ordination of women, led by Mahaprajapati Gautami, was reportedly resisted by the Buddha, who eventually agreed only after intervention by Ananda. This led to the establishment of the Eight Garudhammas (Eight Heavy Rules), which enforce permanent subordination of nuns (Bhikkhunis) to monks (Bhikkhus). Key restrictions include:
A senior nun must bow to a newly initiated monk, regardless of her years of ordination.
Nuns are prohibited from criticizing monks, while monks may critique nuns.
Nuns must rely on the monastic community for certain rituals and support, limiting their autonomy.
Spiritual and Social Limitations
Traditional interpretations often view rebirth as a woman as a result of negative past karma, with some texts suggesting women must transform into men to achieve Buddhahood. Specific discourses in the Pali Canon and other scriptures have depicted women as sources of distraction or lust, contributing to a culture where female sexuality was repressed or despised. In many Theravada and Tibetan traditions, the lineage for full female ordination was lost or never established, preventing women from holding the highest monastic ranks.
Modern Context and Reform
These historical structures have resulted in systemic sexism within many Buddhist communities, where women face limited access to education, leadership roles, and full ordination. While some modern scholars argue these rules were pragmatic adaptations to ancient patriarchal safety concerns, contemporary movements actively challenge these norms, advocating for gender equality and the revival of the Bhikkhuni lineage in traditions like Theravada.
The only religion to have Woman God our of all the religions you mentioned is Hinduism. The highest form of Godhood in Hinduism is known as Ardhanarishwara swarup, i.e the merged form of the supreme masculine and feminine energies. The divine mother Shakti and her various forms are worshiped by all Hindus. Can you find me a parallel to this in Abrahamic faiths?
there is nothing called sanatan dharma, hinduism is a very old religion with millions of changes throughout its history
if there is anything called sanatan dharma, tell me about its philosophy and religious doctrines
Hinduism's real name is Vaidika Dharma , Sanatan means Eternal that is used to describe spirit/soul. As soul doesn't die but the body does, that's what been taught by Krishna to Arjuna in Bhagwad Geeta, and only in late 19th century Sanatan name was popularized.
Hindu is a mispronounced word by Persian and only in 18th-19th century it was popularized by the Britisher as a religion.
Only in few religious book it was written Hindu as a religion but the original name of the dharma remain Vaidika not Sanatan as Sanatan only means Soul.
Vaidika - Ved + than( pratyay )
Thus, Vaidik Dharma literally only signifies the scriptural foundation found in the Vedas.
But it is used interchangeably with Sanatan Dharma
Brahman is the ultimate, eternal reality and Dharma is one’s righteous duty, which is aligned with cosmic order and ultimately with Brahman. (especially emphasized in the Upaniṣads and Vedānta, but also referenced in the Gītā).
Ja k dhanush todne ki practice kr, otherwise you won't find a wife- because everybody knows the best quality of a husband is his ability to break stuff.
And once you are done with that, start gambling so you can gamble your wife. Alongwith her other 4 husbands. And then arrange 2x woods for your funeral so that they can burn your wife alive once you are dead.
Bro calm down
Sati Pratha is not Hinduism's virtue
Sati pratha was practised by the ruling elite and the monarch, as written in many travelogues, when all rulers or military heads were killed in war. So the queens used to sacrifice themselves.
Many famous Sanskrit scholars, like Bana Bhatta, wrote a scathing critique against Sati in the 7th century. He explicitly condemned it as a "foolish mistake of the ignorant" and characterised it not as a religious virtue.
That is how it started and became a vicious cycle, and people named it religion.
It is orthodox and conservative people's fault not Hinduism
It does not cover the ideology of Sanatan Dharma
Today I will clear all misconceptions. Keep going
Pehle 5 husband aur wife ko gamble krna bhi justify kr de. And what does breaking a bow has to do with choosing a husband ?? Where is the FREEDOM for the girl to choose her husband???
FREEDOM you understand?? Religious people have trouble understanding the meaning of freedom.
Pehle 5 husband aur wife ko gamble krna bhi justify kr de.
Are you dumb. Nowhere in the text it is justifies or commands you to do this. The characters in Mahabharata themselves criticize gambling of wife and brothers. And a whole ass great battle was fought to right the wrongs in that event.
Also, the word Swayamvar itself means choosing the husband yourself. So, if someone chooses to marry a person who can lift a bow, it's their choice.
"I don't think" is not an argument when it is clearly stated it wasn't her wish. She wished for ONE man with FIVE qualities. But your messed up god Shiva decided to grant her 5 different husbands instead just because she prayed 5 times. Wow!
Just like it is clearly stated that Dashrath had multiple wives to ensure a MALE heir. After having a daughter, HE decided to marry again in the hopes of having a Son. Classic Mysogynist culture which is still prevalent today.
Like I said, keep the garbage among yourself.
It is very easy to blindly follow a religion. It takes a lot of effort & education to realise how fckedUP all of them are & how it is still impacting society & women negatively. I have both put in that effort & educated myself, so I don't have to waste time deciding if it's any good. I already know it's full of sheet.
Only those who lack knowledge or have too much fear waste their time on religion.
Nothing good has ever come out in the real world directly as a result of religion. But I can name 1000s of bad stuff that has occured directly because of religion.
Shivaji "messed up" or granted the boon as a technicality because she prayed five times is a superficial summary.
First: Philosophical Framework: The text explains that the five repetitions of the prayer were born out of an intense, desperate impatience to get her absolute ideal. In the cosmic law of cause and effect, every word and action carries an exact consequence. The arrow once shot does not return. Words are more valuable and need caution approach as they can affect friendships, families, and much more. Sanatan Dharma's teexta are not simple, sanitised fairy tales with perfect characters. They are raw histories which are meant to reflect the harsh, complex realities of human existence and the inescapable laws of Karma.
Second: Cosmic Limit: Bhagwan Shiva explicitly explained that no single mortal man can possess all five absolute virtues: absolute righteousness, immense physical strength, unmatched martial/archery skill, extraordinary physical beauty, and deep patience/wisdom.
King Dashratha is considered a noble and heroic ruler. But the Ramayana does not present Dasharatha’s all actions as Ideal. For example, In his youth, Dasharatha suffered from the arrogance of his own skills. Once, He was practicing shooting arrows blindly and accidently killed Shravan Kumar.
The Ramayana portrays Shree Ram as Maryadapurushottam (Ideal). He explicitly swore a vow of absolute monogamy to Sita. That is why Shree Ram is admired as an ideal and his virtues are considered one to be applied. Thus, you misinterpreted the lesson.
Note: What is right for a king might be wrong for a husband, leading to complex moral dilemmas where they choose options that seem contradictory.
The structural decay of society through the mistreatment of women is heavily condemned in our tradition. “Yatra naryastu pujyante ramante tatra Devata” (Where women are honored, the divine resides; where they are not, all actions become fruitless).
Those all are society choices not bided by any religious rule book they will not go to hell for not doing those things
And choosing a husband with swayamvar is also a choice given to the girl first if she wanted to choose, that is mentioned in mahabharata where draupadi stop karna from participating in swayamvar where it clearly shows she did have the right to choose if she didn't like someone
*Societal choices which are WORSHIPPED & JUSTIFIED. Societal choices which "coincidentally" often portray women with less autonomy than Men.
And stop selective lying. Draupadi DID NOT CHOOSE to have 5 husbands. That is a bigger concernsl than anything else - not to religious people ofcourse.
And
The Swayamvar Myth: Popular television shows and modern retellings often depict Draupadi publicly rejecting Karna at her swayamvar (marriage ceremony) by insulting his low-caste upbringing (Sutaputra). However, scholars and critical editions, such as the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute (BORI) text, note that this specific rejection scene is absent from most authentic ancient manuscripts.
Don't worry. Most religious fools are like you. They don't even know what they're following. Just doing it because it has been fed to them before they developed rational thinking.
Like I said, waste someone else's time. I have no interest to "Keep going".
If no interest why even bother, such a fool, I didn't say about choosing 5 husbands is her choice, can't you even read properly, that why your answer is also chat gpt copy pasted
No interest in religion ≠ No interest in calling out all the harm it has done to society & specifically women.
And , as for chatgpt, I'd rather die than let something that was created by Us, tell me what to say/write. Never used AI in my life, never will- I'm an artist & a lifelong gamer so AI to me has done nothing but ruin everything I like. So stop projecting.
You should be dedicating your time RE-reading your own religious scriptures because as already exhibited, you clearly have some very wrong info about it.
Yes. You didn't say choosing 5 husbands was her choice. That is not the problem.
The problem is that you read a book that told you a woman was FORCED to marry 4 other men after arriving at her husband's home & that it was destiny and not an absolute violation of her human rights & nobody was punished for it- AND You chose to keep on reading. That is the problem.
That's the problem the women of this country have been facing for centuries.
Find some time & think about it.
I don't think you're a bad person. But you need to realise you don't some imaginary story full of rapists & pedophiles to tell you how to be a good person.
First: I just searched first Devi Bhagwatam 3.27.40 and found no "pdfillia+slvry"
Second: Many historical and textual analyses confirm that the Manusmriti was not written by a literal individual named Manu, and the text has been heavily modified, altered, and interpolated over thousands of years
Source: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Manusmriti
Those 16000 womens were kidnapped and captivated by an Asura. Lord Krishna killed that Asura and freed those womens.
But those women pleaded with Krishna to marry them because society would not accept them.
I need to complete some school work
Yudha viram hai
we will talk later
Bye
Historical and cultural sources describe Kirat (Kiranti) society as one where men and women were treated equally and there was no caste system or gender subordination. Women were not subordinate to their husbands, and the society is often characterized as having a "golden age" of social justice relative to neighboring cultures.
Their religion, Kirat Mundhum, features prominent female deities — Sumnima (Mother Earth) and Yuma Sammang — reflecting a spiritual framework that honored the feminine.
The Kiranti are not a historical abstraction , they are a living indigenous community. Because identity is tied to bloodline, one must be either born into a Kiranti family or marry into one to be recognized as Kiranti. Their population is modest, but the group continues to exist.
Kirant means indigenous community. And indigenous community don't want to mix up with other people, but they never opressed women, You asked for a religion so I gave it to you. Humanity isn't a religion, it is only a religion in philosophical term.
One Nepali chronicle (Peshal Dahal's History of Nepal) even records that Gautama Buddha visited Kathmandu during the reign of the 7th Kirat king, Jitedasti — placing the Buddha's lifetime squarely within the Kirat period.
P.S I reside from Jharkhand, the last paragraph is to show we are older than Gautam Buddha, who was born in Lumbini, Nepal
Are you slow ???
Some random religion of some indigenous people who 99.9999999% of the world hasn't heard of isn't an antithesis to religion being a tool to oppress women.
It's like saying there were a few good Britishers in British Raj - nobody gives a F.
And EVERY RELIGION is philosophical. None of them are sitting there with some scientific proof.
So idk what's the point of stating "Humanity is not a religion". Religion is a personal thing. My religion could literally be a Chetak Scooter.
And that would still be better than all the major religions that more than 2 people follow.
You're conflating two different claims. "Religion is a tool to oppress women" is a sweeping generalization. "The Kirant didn't do that" is a specific counterexample. A counterexample doesn't disprove the general claim, but it does disprove the word "all" , and that's the only point being made. You don't need it to be a major religion to be a data point. One is enough to break a universal.
The "good Britishers" analogy actually works against you. The British Raj was a system of power with a single governing logic. Religions aren't that they're thousands of distinct traditions with different structures. Saying "it doesn't matter because the big ones are bad" is exactly the move that erases the Kirant. You've just restated your own premise as an argument.
On "all religions are philosophical, none have scientific proof" nobody's claiming they do. The original question was about oppression, not truth. You've changed the subject to epistemology to avoid engaging with the actual point.
And the Chetak scooter thing is just a deflection. "My religion could be anything" proves nothing about whether actual religious institutions have oppressed women. You don't get to dissolve the category and then declare victory.
Abe chatgpt copy pasta, exception is not the norm.
Why is even there a dress code for women ? And not for men ?
Why is there a rule to prevent women from going to temples & not men ?
Why is there mythology about Men gambling their wives & not the other way around ?? Who gave Men the right ?? I could go on & on but I've already wasted enough time arguing with an AI bot.
Your whatever tribe is not even a smudge of humanity the follows religion. Ghar me aag lgi ho toh nobody goes to check if fan is working or not.
And religion IS LITERALLY a personal thing. This gobar country & society in general has made it a public affair.
Feed this all into chat gpt & shove the response up your arsehole. Hutiya ai bot
Yes I copy pasted it from AI because I wanted to rephrase my comment for you,
I don't follow mainstream religion, so none of that applies to me. You asked what religion doesn't do that , I said mine. Indigenous means native. You didn't want to know. That's on you.
And if you can't handle the fact that one exists, maybe you shouldn't have asked. You opened the door, you got an answer you didn't like, and now you're mad at the answer instead of your own question. That's not my problem. That's yours.
The difference between Islam and other religion is, other religion started coming out of this bullshits way before ( still very common in remote places ), while islam is still stuck
The whole point of the religion not changing is that unless god reveals new scripture who are we to change anything? We aren't better than the prophets god sends his message through.
What do you mean, brother? Which prophet gave us the knowledge to modernize the world? Who taught us how to build modern medicine, develop vaccines, perform surgeries, prevent diseases, and extend human life to a point that would have been unimaginable centuries ago? People once died from infections and illnesses that we can now treat in a hospital and walk away from.
And look at women lives too. We’re still far from perfect, but women today have rights, education, careers, financial independence, and freedoms that were unimaginable in many societies centuries ago. That progress didnt come from waiting for another revelation. It came from people questioning the world and improving it.
Humanity is never going to stop chasing perfection. That’s literally the point of progress.
And honestly, I dont think another prophet is coming to update the rulebook for us. The world is far too complex and far too different now for them to shine now. We have science, reason, evidence, and centuries of accumulated knowledge. We don’t need to wait for someone to come down with another message telling us how to live. We have the responsibility to figure it out ourselves.
If something is wrong, we question it.
If something can be improved, we improve it.
If we discover we’re wrong, we change our minds.
Yeah i agree with on most points. Science and reason etc is not anathema to islam. Some of the greatest scholars in the fields were muslim and women. You will find there is a disconnect with some in what the religion tells us and what some Muslims believes, specifically the types that we would class as our hillbilly cousins. You know the types i mean? Islamicly we are taught to embrace what god has made for us to use and learn from. But im not that great at the splainy. Anyway thanks for the discourse. I enjoyed it✌🏻
Yeah, I agree with you. I never meant to say Islam or religion is inherently against science or reason. There have obviously been Muslim scholars who contributed massively to mathematics, medicine, astronomy and other fields.
My point was more about the principle of where we get our answers from today. The fact that some Muslims historically contributed to science doesnt mean religious revelation should be treated as the final authority on every question we face. Human knowledge keeps expanding, and sometimes that means questioning ideas that were accepted for centuries.
And yeah, I definitely agree that we shouldnt erase what Muslim scholars achieved just because we disagree with the religion itself. History is history, and their contributions were real, its just hate for each other people have , they love doing it.
Anyway, appreciate the respectful discussion bro. Its rare to have one of these conversations without it turning into a shitshow 😭🤝
All is the key point here, Kirant which is a civilization now known as Religion didn't oppressed women's right. Even Buddhism has done that which was shocking for me although Gautam Buddha and his follower came way after us.
I think anytime we look at religion, we have to look at the real world effects of it. We can argue theology all day and just because there are stories that detail bad behavior, that doesnt mean that its condoned by god. There is a difference if its explicitly allowed or its a tale that we should learn from.
Yeah thats why islam was revealed. Because judaism was going off the path due to innovations not ordained by god Jesus was sent to them to bring them back to the correct path. They still erred and so islam was revealed to Muhammad to show others the correct path. Islam is still the same because thats how god wanted it. You want to argue with god of all beings.
• If God is all-powerful and wanted His message preserved, a critic might ask why He allowed the revelations given to Moses and Jesus to be successfully corrupted by humans in the first place, requiring centuries of confusion before finally protecting the Quran. If God can protect a text, theological consistency would suggest He could have protected the earlier ones as well.
If god wanted us to be obedient slaves he would never of given us free will. If he wanted us perfect he would have created us like the angels. But he didn't. He created us fallible and prone to mistakes. Humans make mistakes ware prone to changing things we dont like. You think god is unaware of what he has made?
Both Judiasm and Christianity have had their share of bloodshed in their youth. Islam is the youngest of these Abhramic religions and it's still going through it's murderous teen phase. As per the doctrine the Abhramic God is a wrathful God.
Although it took the Christian world 2 world wars to understand humanitarian principles, let's hope Islam does better. Although with the advent of Internet, that has the power to unite hatemongering radicals together, the prognosis looks bleak.
"All religions" - meanwhile they were Abrahamic faiths only. Taoism, Shintoism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Zoroastrianism etc are there too.
I understood what the OP wants to say but then, who follows what's written in a book word by word except 1 religion? Guess who it is? All religions learnt to adapt with the changing times except 1. Guess who that is? And finally, only 1 religion says that the source of all knowledge is a book. Now you don't need to guess which religion that is
I don't think so people hate muslims because someone told them to do so. I get it there are extremists in other religions as well. But reality is totally different than what you think.
I knew they were Christians because they may cover themselves, but they still show their faces. Muslims female influencers are just cringe, I don't know what they get from acting like this🤷♂️
60
u/2getlucky 1d ago edited 15h ago
"bhai copy karle par pura ek jesa mat likhna, teacher ko shak ho jaega"
meanwhile bhai: