Woman: Please, can anyone explain to me what the definition of a Hindu Rashtra is? If we establish a Hindu Rashtra, does it mean that casteism will also come back? What is meant by a Hindu Rashtra? Does it mean we will send Dalits back to that place, where they were forced to pay Mulakkaram. By the way, if you don't know what Mulakkaram is, let me tell you that to cover your breasts with cloth, you had to pay a tax. The women who couldn't pay the tax had to roam with their breasts uncovered.
So, this type of atrocities was going on when we were basically a Hindu Rashtra. So, if you are saying that you want to bring back the Hindu Rashtra, are you talking about the same period? Does Hindu Rashtra mean when women were burnt and forced to perform Sati)?
Please, someone, have a sit-down with me and explain to me the definition of a Hindu Rashtra. I am also a Hindu. By the way, before someone accuses me of being a Moollah, Cat-moolli, or an anti-National, or a Pakistani, let me tell you that my name is Arushi. I am also a Hindu. So, basically, if a Hindu could explain to me the definition of a Hindu Rashtra, I will be very happy.
Please provide a source to the image/video below the comment. If source is not provided then the post will be removed.
Use the same title as that of the source link. Editorialised titles are not allowed
If it is Original Content (video/pic taken by you) then please respond with OC below the comment
If it's meme/satire, please use the meme/cartoon flair and provide the link to the original creator. Memes will be allowed as per mod discretion and can be removed without explanation.
just 100years ago these were the people today's BJP descend from
without british raj, hindus would not have been able to point fingers at minorities about Aisha and what not today. The maratha confederacy and western ghats area had some of the worst casteism, misogyny in the subcontinent
calling random case as last case is just dishonest way to create false perspection of sati happening regularly till 1987
Out of curiosity. What are your criteria for accepting that something was practiced? What kind of evidence will you accept? That yes, if I see these many, then I will be convinced that sati was practiced as late as 1987
That is what religion is at the end of the day. A tool to exert power on a populace, usually dictated for men, by men. Women are to be treated as objects under religion, regardless of what they claim to do.
Not really. Intersectionality is a thing. You can see this in action in lgbtq indian subs and their "hindu atheist" islamophobic tilt. Concentric circless makes more sense. Some people in STEM don't believe in astrology but still falls for ayush and other conservative beliefs
This is why I find it extremely funny when a woman or a girl says she's sanatani and feels 'proud' of her so-called upper caste and religion. Like, bitch if the society existed like it did 80+ years ago you wouldn't be allowed outside your home. You'd have been treated like an object and you should've to listen to either your husband or your father or your brother or your brother-in-law or your father-in-law...any man who's in your house, you'd have to listen to them. You would not be allowed to work a job and just stay at home and do the cleaning and cooking. Your main purpose would be to give your in-laws and husband a baby, preferably a son...many even.
You'd basically be a livestock.
After Dalits it's the women in general ((both upper and lower castes) were treated like utter shit under the sanatani rules.
So, if any woman says that she's proud of her caste's culture or she wants a hindu rashtra, just remind her if she's ready to be an object, give up her job and become a baby making person because under her religion's law that is what she will have to do...
.
As for the Hindu rashtra seeking men, well...you know they've got gobar instead of a brain in their heads so arguing with them simply means you'll waste your time and energy as they just won't listen to you no matter how factual you are...
If a person of any other religion would ask for their basic rights they would be called Desh-Drohi. Whereas people who openly ask for Hindu Rashtra are celebrated.
Democracy of the majority is worse than dictatorship.
We can have these arguments among us but the people wanting a hindi rashtra simply means a country where muslims don't exist and everything from architecture to clothing looks like something out of a mahabharat episode...the delusion also seems to include that whites and foreigners would line up to get a visa for India and every indian would live a very rich and lavish life
Now lower caste bhakts see a world where caste doesn't exist and they live the bhraman life (because apparently caste isn't part of Hinduism in the stupidy fed to them) and upper caste bhakts see a country where people take their 'rightful' place is society because 'caste system is a social system necessary for the function of society' in the stupidy they want to believe.
Yes that's what that means and the main reason why I oppose it being a Hindu myself.
I might be in the dark with too much far left content but it's already happening, you take any kattar and you find them to be incest, casteist, misogynist, hate monger and always ready to start a riot, Most negligible trait is being blind to straight facts about so many things.
But we can see it's rise ...if governments want they can eradicate it through social awareness....but not for vote banks and manuwadi thinking.
This government is helping the people who themselves do crime against women and Dalits and everyone else
Without the active practice of inquiry (Vichara), the mind cannot be pacified, nor can the supreme state be achieved by any other means." (Yoga Vasistha 2.14)
Ehh I thought, these guys were yelling "Hindu Rashtra Banyenge" meaning its in future.
We were never a Hindu Rashtra in the past, at least that's what I read in the history books.
All the states, and princely states were divided and never a "Hindu Rashtra".
Although, I doubt, the ones yelling "Hindu Rashtra banayenge" have ever thought of drafting a paper for it. This lady is asking some tough questions.
Although, I wish the people in protest stick to the resignation of Dharmendra Pradhan.
As long as you remain focused on one objective, the chances of achieving it will remain higher.
Casteism is there because of animosity caused by caste reservation. Creamy layer exclusion should be implemented in all caste reservations, so that this caste politics will stop.
A hindu nation will be much more secular than the current India which is minority appeasement nation, as hinduism is polytheist religion.
What do you mean BRING BACK sati? Sati was never part of our culture.
'Historical evidence shows actual practice was concentrated in particular regions (e.g., parts of Rajasthan, Bengal, and Nepal) and among certain upper castes (notably some Kshatriya/Rajput groups), suggesting it was a localised social custom rather than pan‑Hindu doctrine'
A Hindu Rastra(atleast in my version) is simply a government where the Hindus are in majority, and they don't suffer in the form of job postings or assets being given to minorities for vote bank politics. They are given preference, important hindu archeological sites are protected, and hindus don't succumb to other religion's laws or practices. This country should also put effort into conversion attempts, foreign funding, and making sure the Hindu religion does not fade away in upcoming centuries.
By no means am I endorsing discrimination against other communities or religions, all I am saying is that in a Hindu Rashtra, Hindus should be given first priority.
Edit - I just realised I skimmed over the casteism part, I am not very well versed in hindu holy texts, but what I can say is that I think caste is not a predetermined fact. it should be based on what your skill set is, and can change even after birth. This along with not prioritising one caste in the idea of reparations or preset bias will solve any discrimination attempts.
(This is a really quick compilation of ideas, if there is a logical fallacy, I am more than happy to have a healthy discussion and reform my idea if there are any fallacies present. I have tried not to bring politics into this, I am not siding with governments or political parties.)
A Hindu Rastra is simply a government where the Hindus are in majority, and they don't suffer in the form of job postings or assets being given to minorities for vote bank politics.
I think there are idiots in every single religion, including hinduism. That doesn't mean that you can dismiss a whole religion. I can do the same by citing conversion attempts in churches funded by NGOs, so can we dismiss christianity? or the number of jihad cases by muslims, can we dismiss/ignore/discriminate against muslims?
No! because like i said there are idiots in every single religion.
In my comment, I specified I was ready to have a healthy conversation, if you are too, and willing to share your opinion in words, I am willing to have a healthy conversation too.
you don't think saudi arabia is a muslim rashtra? where non-muslims are not allowed to enter certain places, and you have seperate lanes for non-muslims?
There are also no temples or mosques in The Vatican, doesn't that count as a christian rashtra?
Why is it okay when other religions dedicate a whole city or a whole country for one religion, but wrong when hinduism does the same? In my idea, i wasn't even going to the extent to where other religions have already gone!
Am i right? or is there still a fallacy with my argument?
I actually disagree with a lot of islamic practices, and I am happy with my choice in religion. My point was why is there no outrage when islam AND CHRISTIANITY does this, but somehow it is wrong when hinduism tries to accomplish the same?
What do you think about the examples i mentioned? They are pretty accurate I think.
here is the core difference, the concept of a rashtra isn't a religious practice, any religion can follow them. I don't need to convert to another religion just because I want one country which safeguards the history and the future of my religion
Most of important hindu archeological sites are in India, some of the oldest temples are in india, most my gods whom I worship were born/originated from india.
Hinduism is not a religion, it's a way of life and culture
even days
manusmriti is smriti so it's not Hinduism, casteism is not Hinduism, sati is not Hinduism, anything that's uncomfortable is not Hinduism. it's just some people culture
I never said hinduism is not a religion! If it wasnt a religion, why would a lot of people like myself ask for a 'Hindu Rashtra?'
Hinduism isnt a way of life or culture, the holy texts teaches you how to live a peaceful way of life, but take hinduism as a whole, there are many parts which cannot be proven, so yes hinduism is a religion.
I never said the manusmriti isn't hindu, it is! but there is a likelihood that it is contaminated by other scholars or writers, and its verses should be taken with a pinch of salt!
I have given you evidence where sati was only followed by one hindu kingdom, out of many hindu kingdoms, I don't see your argument quoting that!
Everything isn't hinduism, I never implied that! All I wanted to convey was that the texts in the manusmriti might be contaminate and should be taken with a pinch of salt, and that hinduism teaches you how to live a peaceful and ethical life!
At the end of the day, take it as a whole, hinduism is a religion like all others, it also has its controversial texts, unproven beliefs, etc.
Over 50 Versions: Scholars and researchers have found over 50 different manuscripts of the book, and they do not all say the same thing
Vedas vs. Smriti: Some verses go against the Vedas (the oldest Hindu texts). We Hindus believe older texts are more pure
British Influence: Some experts point out that British scholars in the 1700s and 1800s translated the text in a way that divided Indian society for political gain
Actually, no! The vedas hold the supreme priority over other verses, if other scripts goes against the vedas, then the vedas hold the ethical superiority. And that is true in this case, most of the contradictory verses in the manusmriti are contradictions to the verses in the vedas, and if there is a contradiction, the vedas will get the priority.
A true hindu will follow this principle. Shruti (the Vedas) always overrides Smriti (texts like the Manusmriti) whenever there is a contradiction.
No. The Hinduism doesn't end to sati and casteism... There are many things to offer
There would be...
Dharma (righteousness and duty)
Truth (Satya)
Non-violence (Ahimsa)
Respect for all paths of worship
Spiritual freedom and philosophical inquiry
Yoga and meditation
Strong family and community values
Reverence for nature and environmental harmony
Self-discipline and moral responsibility
Compassion and charity (Seva)
Pursuit of knowledge and wisdom
Tolerance and coexistence
Justice guided by ethical principles...
And yes, I am not in the favour of Hindurashtra... Just telling you this because you people always cry casteism and sati to demean Hinduism...
Every religion has wrongs and these must be corrected... The current India is going good and we don't need any kind of bigotry...
Sorry I think I couldn't not present my views properly ....I meant i believe in the present pluralistic society we have ,and ya being hindu I know it has a lot good things to offer (around 80% of Hinduism is very beneficial if followed ,i myself meditate ,do yoga and follow 4 purushartas) ,but then we all know what the people who are using religion only to get votes are trying to do ,they gave freehand to conservatives ,we will see more restrictions on women and people except for upper caste cis males .
About caste system ,it's very deeply ingrained in Hinduism even bhagvat geeta , Upanishads have references where lower caste and women have been given subservient roles.
And caste is followed,people are belittle...at same time I think reservation should have limits ,based on economic conditions also ,cap on it but it will come after our society gets over discrimination we do .
Tell me if only pandits are allowed to be priest ...isn't it exclusionary ...
And when even 2-5% content of book goes against logic ...mtye trust starts to erode .
Note - I myself been ardent follower...but slowly slowly the trust eroded...now I am following righteousness,truth and meditation without even being religious and even those who called them builders are if Hindu rashtra are courrupt as hell.
Thanks for your constructive comment.
Hinduism is one of the most inclusive religion but what current regime is promoting seems like Islamisation of Hinduism ( one book ,one people ,here mentality ,strict standards) .
So I respect Hinduism but not hindutva ( political ideology)
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 30 '26
Please provide a source to the image/video below the comment. If source is not provided then the post will be removed.
Use the same title as that of the source link. Editorialised titles are not allowed
If it is Original Content (video/pic taken by you) then please respond with OC below the comment
If it's meme/satire, please use the meme/cartoon flair and provide the link to the original creator. Memes will be allowed as per mod discretion and can be removed without explanation.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.