Timeline for Why does Uma Samhita, Chapter 24 of Shiva Purana insult Women?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
28 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 27, 2017 at 8:38 | comment | added | user9392 | @akansha better read the below accepted answer. It explains that women are shown this obnoxious only to induce detachment from strong sexual longings of men. | |
| Jun 26, 2017 at 16:48 | comment | added | akansha | if in a movie, the villain says that "He will rape the heroine". But he gets arrested in the movie. Now, does it mean that movie message is to rape all the women. If some religious text has some dialogue, then you have to see that whether that sentence has been spoken by protagonist. If in Ramayana, Ravana kidnaps sita, then does that mean Ramayana tells us that "we should kidnapped women"?? Here if apsara tells the above sentences to Narada, then how does it mean the book's itself's whole intention is to demean women? Is apsara, heroine of the text or a protagonist of the text? | |
| Jun 26, 2017 at 15:33 | history | edited | Sarvabhouma |
edited tags
|
|
| May 27, 2017 at 21:05 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | moved from User.Id=9392 by developer User.Id=2 | |
| May 27, 2017 at 11:13 | history | edited | The Destroyer♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| May 27, 2017 at 10:59 | answer | added | The Destroyer♦ | timeline score: 12 | |
| May 27, 2017 at 6:37 | comment | added | Rakesh Joshi | cool. the soon u understand rational the better it is. | |
| May 27, 2017 at 6:36 | comment | added | user9392 | @RakeshJoshi Yes. I will take your suggestion literally. :). Well, seriously thank you. I do understand what you mean. | |
| May 27, 2017 at 5:14 | comment | added | Rakesh Joshi | u have to apply yourself in order to find out interpolation | |
| May 26, 2017 at 22:00 | comment | added | user9392 | @Tezz the above comment to you too. ;) ;) | |
| May 26, 2017 at 21:59 | comment | added | user9392 | @RakeshJoshi Thank you. And please don't mind me, I do not mean it literally. But you should take this comment literally. I mean when we are thinking literally we do not take things literally, but in reality we are literally not finding what to take literally. But I think you can understand it literally, because I mean it literally. AND Yes, DO TAKE THIS COMMENT LITERALLY. ;) ;) | |
| May 26, 2017 at 18:11 | comment | added | Rakesh Joshi | not like that but there is interpolation and alterations in the scriptures. and some of the stories are symbolic and should not be taken literally .. | |
| May 26, 2017 at 17:54 | comment | added | user9392 | @RakeshJoshi How can it be so? Any storyhas good probability of being true or false. Does that mean that Shiva, MahaKali, Narayana, Brahmaa, MahaLakshmi, MahaSaraswati, and other Gods, and Rishis, the Serpents, NavaGrahas, Danava, Yaksha, Apsara, Yogini, Vasus, Maruts, et cetera, were all stories, and imagination. | |
| May 26, 2017 at 17:44 | comment | added | Rakesh Joshi | not most but where such obvious dispute happen or there is major contradiction ... it can be understood via comparing , contemplating and analysing. | |
| May 26, 2017 at 17:33 | comment | added | user9392 | @RakeshJoshi , then that means most of the puranas stories and dialogues were just imagination, and these events never happened? | |
| May 26, 2017 at 8:26 | comment | added | Rakesh Joshi | Its an obvious interpolation let anyone be the speaker and listener. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 19:48 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | moved from User.Id=9392 by developer User.Id=2 | |
| May 27, 2017 at 21:05 | |||||
| May 24, 2017 at 12:58 | history | edited | Tezz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| May 24, 2017 at 8:02 | comment | added | user9392 | @Tezz moreover, if this conversation was not important it would have never been in The Shiva MahaPuraana. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 8:01 | comment | added | user9392 | @Tezz Narada was fully satisfied with words of apsara. Narada is no fool who would take anything as true. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 4:40 | comment | added | The Destroyer♦ | How can Uma Samhita insult women which is named after Uma (the embodiment of all Prakriti and women)? | |
| May 24, 2017 at 4:22 | comment | added | Swami Vishwananda | As Tezz says in his answer, these words were spoken to a man in order to help him give up lust. If a woman was being spoken to instead of a man, the same vile things would be said about a man to evoke the woman to give up lust. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 4:19 | history | edited | Tezz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| May 24, 2017 at 2:25 | answer | added | Tezz | timeline score: 10 | |
| May 24, 2017 at 1:28 | comment | added | ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ | Man if material, wallowing in physical pleasures & uninterested in God, he alone is like that. But if woman is material, wallowing in physical pleasures & uninterested in God, much possibility her children also become like her because she is the primary source of creation & first Guru of her children - might be the reason, Hindu society took extra care of women. If you hate theoretical sayings, observe around - you will know the significance of mother more than a father. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 1:23 | comment | added | ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ | There are many Ekarthi words today which were once Bahuarthi. Words lose their scope & context over the time. Stri means uneducated, material women without any interest in God as well. They might have translated looking at current meanings & present context. | |
| May 24, 2017 at 1:20 | comment | added | Tezz | 1-It is the dialogue between Narada and Apsara Panchachuda. And Apsara is telling these things. Hence these things should be looked upon as authority of Apsara not authority of Bhagavan.......... ...... ........ ... 2-It was intended to generate detachment in Narada by telling such things. At last it is told "Listening to the words of the nymph and taking them to be true, Nãrada felt detached." | |
| May 23, 2017 at 20:55 | history | asked | user9392 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |