Busting Myths:-Women's Roles, Rapes, Sati, and Pardah in Ancient India"?

Busting Myths:-Women's Roles, Rapes, Sati, and Pardah in Ancient India"?

 

Women are an integral part of society, and even in today's modern age, women do not enjoy full rights. In rural areas of India, women often face mistreatment. Shockingly, this issue is not confined to rural regions; even in urban areas, women are sometimes treated poorly and seen as inferior to men, merely objects of enjoyment. Moreover, when a woman is a victim of assault, it's often viewed as her fault, not the perpetrator's. But ancient India was different from these misconceptions. Some might question practices like Sati and Pardah, but let's address these issues in this blog. People often assume that Western society has always granted more rights to women, while Indian culture disrespects women. However, this is not entirely true. I'm not suggesting that Vedic society was utopian, but it wasn't as regressive as some portray it. The status of women was far better than it is today. Practices like child marriage, Sati, and Purdah are "social evils" and NOT "religious evils."

Exploring two extremes

Some people mistakenly believe that the Vedic society was entirely without flaws, while others view it as an uncivilized and impoverished era. Both of these perspectives are incorrect. Nothing can be entirely perfect, nor entirely flawed.. Even in vedic era rape occurred, there were atheists and evil prople but at same time vedic society was a devoloping and intellectual,scientific civilization. So I thought to clear this confusion first before coming to the main part.

Arguments

 

Some argue that the Vedas are discriminatory towards women. They point to verses like Rigveda 10.85.14:

यद॑श्विना पृ॒च्छमा॑ना॒वया॑तं त्रिच॒क्रेण॑ वह॒तुं सू॒र्याया॑: । विश्वे॑ दे॒वा अनु॒ तद्वा॑मजानन्पु॒त्रः पि॒तरा॑ववृणीत पू॒षा ॥

यदश्विना पृच्छमानावयातं त्रिचक्रेण वहतुं सूर्यायाः । विश्वे देवा अनु तद्वामजानन्पुत्रः पितराववृणीत पूषा ॥

 

“O Ashvins, married couple, when you come together by the three wheeled mental chariot of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas constituents of personality in balance, asking for fulfilment of the wedding of Surya, let all the Vishvedevas, nobilities around and the mind and senses within, know and approve your intent and purpose, and then let “son”, future progeny for sustenance, select the life giving parents for the arrival.”

 

The need for a son is emphasized in this verse.

 

Rigveda 10.85.42

 

इ॒हैव स्तं॒ मा वि यौ॑ष्टं॒ विश्व॒मायु॒र्व्य॑श्नुतम् । क्रीळ॑न्तौ पु॒त्रैर्नप्तृ॑भि॒र्मोद॑मानौ॒ स्वे गृ॒हे ॥

 

“Be ye not parted; dwell ye here reach the full time of human life. With sons and grandsons sport and play, rejoicing in your own abode.”

 

In this verse also the need of sons and grandsons is mentioned.

 

Reply

Now let me show these rascals some verses which show a different perspective

Rigveda 10.159.3

 

 

 

मम॑ पु॒त्राः श॑त्रु॒हणोऽथो॑ मे दुहि॒ता वि॒राट् । उ॒ताहम॑स्मि संज॒या पत्यौ॑ मे॒ श्लोक॑ उत्त॒मः ॥

“My sons are the destroyers of my enemies, my daughter is an empress; and I am victorious, my fameis most precious to my husband.”

 

Also you can see these verses Yajurveda 22.22, Rigveda 4.32.23 and Atharvaveda 10.3.20.

 

Now, a question arises: They mention that we do not welcome daughters in the first verse, and yet in subsequent verses, they emphasize the importance of women. What's the confusion here? Those who present these arguments often do not have a deep understanding of Sanskrit or the Vedas. It's crucial for these individuals to first learn the Sanskrit language and delve into the Vedas. The word "Putra" does not exclusively refer to sons; it encompasses both sons and daughters. "Putra" is a term used for children in a broader sense. It's somewhat similar to contemporary language usage, where we often default to using "he" even when discussing non-gender-specific scenarios. This practice is incorrect, and we should indeed promote using "he/she" wherever the context is not gender-specific. However, the historical preference for "he" is a point worth addressing. In a similar vein, the Vedas employed the term "putra" to encompass all offspring.

Some other proofs

 

Manusmriti 9.103

 

Thus has been expounded to you the law relating to husband and wife, which is conducive to conjugal happiness,—as also the manner of obtaining children in times of distress; learn now the partition of inheritance.

 

In further versus, we come to know that women had the right to inherit property.

 

Vashishta Dhramasutra 28.2,3

 

A wife, (though) tainted by sin, whether she be quarrelsome, or have left the house, or have suffered criminal force, or have fallen into the hands of thieves, must not be abandoned; to forsake her is not prescribed (by the sacred law).

 

Many a time it has been seen if a woman is raped her family members kick her out of the family but. According to Vashishth Dharmasutra, she should not be abandoned.

 

According to Parashar Smriti also , if a women is raped then she should not be abandoned and not seen with bad eyes. She should not be cursed for the boy’s crime.

 

According to Devala Smriti, if a women is raped then women is still pure and will not lose her character,

 

All these smritis also mention that a man who rapes awomen should be given a death punishment instantly.

Matsya purana states that a person commiting rape should be given death penealty and raped women should not  be given any punishment.

 

Truth of Sati System

 

The Sati system, also known as "suttee," was a historical practice in some parts of India where a widow would self-immolate, or be forced to self-immolate, on her husband's funeral pyre.

 

Many people question me what about this? Isn’t it what the Vedas are saying? They are promoting something like Sati. But these rascals are they haven’t read Puranas, Vedas, Upanishads or anything like that because nothing such as Sati is mentioned in Vedas. Instead Vedas promote widow remarriage. But now let us come to Mahabharat 16.7.3 it mentions that Rukmimni,Gandhari,Shaivya,Haimvati,Jamvati went ino the fire to achieve their husbands. Is this an indication of sati system? the answer is yes But the wives of Abhimanyu Etc. who died during the battle, their wives did not take Sati. So we come to a conclusion that during Mahabharata. Sati was not compulsory. It was taken by some  women who were devoted to their husbands.  they thought that now my husband has died, now I have no right to live so they also burnt in the sacrificial fire. So it was not compulsory. It was just started by some women who were devoted to their husband.

 

Let’s move to first to second century where we get Narada Smriti which again mentions widow remarriage as correct and We also come here to know that only the wives of Rajput rulers after the death of their husband took sati and it was not popular amongst the common women and after the incoming of Muslim rulers in India, it became more prevalent. Hey but why wives of Rajput rulers took sati? Because when their husband was killed during the war, the Queens were raped by the other king(mostly invaders from other countries). and and after the incoming of muslim  soon it became more prevalent amongst the common women also because Muslim rulers raped the common women in many different ways. And then soon it became a rigid practice Which was thought to be religious, but actually it is a social evil, not a religious evil as it is nowhere mentioned in the religious text.

 

 

 

Pardah System

 

 

Purdah is a practice that involves secluding women from public observation by means of concealing clothing (including the veil) and by the use of high-walled

Here’s the most astonishing fact about Pardha system that in none of the Vedas it is mentioned about Pardha system. In Ramayana, there is no mention of this system .In Any of the religious texts there is no mention of pardah system. Nowhere in the Arthashastra it is mentioned and in the Indica also it is not mentioned. In Sunga period there is no mention.

We get mention of Pardah for first time during Mughal period . Purdah was widely adopted by then northern rulers of India for fear of women being captured by invaders.

 

 and you also came to know that Sanatan Dharma was never against the woman.It  is the nation which worships women. It is the nation where Radha is given more prominence than Krishna, where Seeta is given more prominence than Rama, and where Parvati is given more prominence than Shiva. It is said that all the feminine powers are the “Shakti”or power and the male power is “Shaktimaan” or powerful.Without power powerful wont’t exist Obviously, God is beyond genders. But just to make you understand this concept I used. Also before targeting religious scriptures For women discrimination  You should Attack on the Bollywood and Hollywood songs and movies which increase the lust in the children and show women just as a sex object, which is a great cause of rape. But no, you will only get Sanatan dharam because you want to disrespect it. It is the nation where Women wrote Upanishads and who were given best education but with time some rascaals put restrictions on them which soon became rigid. And also before going refer to this verse of Bhagwat Geeta.

 

विद्याविनयसम्पन्ने ब्राह्मणे गवि हस्तिनि |

शुनि चैव श्वपाके च पण्डिता: समदर्शिन:

 

“ The truly learned, with the eyes of divine knowledge, see with equal vision a Brahmin, a cow, an elephant, a dog, and a dog-eater.”

 

So Lord Srikrishna tells you that we should see everyone with equal sight. So. Hence it is proved that male and female are equal here and also sanatan dharm focuses that We should treat everyone  as God himself. And that we should go beyond genders

 

I hope you liked the blog.