New answers tagged

0

My question is, can someone provide an English commentary for that verse, or an English translation of the Sanskrit commentary for that verse? The verse is cited by Vijnaneshvara in the famous Mitakshara, which is a commentary on the Yajnavalkya smriti. He cites this Narada smriti verse in the commentary of a similar Yajnavalkya smriti verse and says that &...


4

These 2 verses show the mindset of ancient householders. Modern Hindus do not have to accept such obviously wrong teachings. Vedic or other scriptural authority does not extend to matters that can be decided by human reason. There is no need to interpret these verses and should be taken at face value and simply rejected. Apologetic defense of the ...


-1

First of all you need to know that woman at that time didn't covered their breasts. As we can see woman are wearing kumkum or sandal paste on their breasts they don't cover it. Now this can be due to health benefits of kumkum maybe it made breasts more beautiful


0

That’s why you should never read colonial English translations of our texts, as they just haven’t got the concept of nirukta or bhavarth. The verse is about “bringing up children” to be worthy people! In the tradition, bringing up children is the responsibility of both husband and wife. And if you’re familiar with the sodasasamskara, then you know that for ...


Top 50 recent answers are included