Richard Dawkins
2005-10-09 21:31:28 UTC
CHILD-MARRIAGE Enforced by the Brahmins, this custom destroyed the very
life-soul of the non-Brahmins. Child marriage of daughters as young 5-6 y
old was common during the Brahmanic Dark Ages due to the custom of dowry [
Nand 17 ] [ Bash.167-8 ] [ Yad 70 ] [ Alt.16 ] [ Ban.70 ]. Lawbooks
prescribe that the best partner for a man in one-third his age. Thus a man
18 year old should marry a girl 6 years old! This is the wonderful wisdom of
the most authoritative Hindu law-book -
Manu.IX.94 : " A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve
who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl of eight years of age; if
(the performance of) his duties would otherwise be impeded, he must marry
sooner."
One of the reasons for such early marriage of girls was to prevent any
scandals. Narada states that some of the defects to be avoided in brides are
if they already had a relationship with another man or have their minds set
on another, they should not be selected [Sheth 67]. This shows that
non-virgin girls could not be married, a custom similar to Church-ruled
medieval Europe.
The custom of child-marriage and child-molesting has divine sanction in
Hinduism. The `great god' Rama was 16 years old when he married Sita, and
Sita was only 14 years old [ Ram.wh 69 ]. However, the age of Sita is now
known to be a forgery; it is almost certain that she was, as per the Manuid
laws, one-third of his age, namely 5 years old. It is inconceivable to
imagine that `great' Rama could have dated to violate the Vedic laws of
Manu. Besides being a child-molester, `holy' Rama was also guilty of incest,
for Sita is referred to in the oldest surviving Ramayanas as his own sister
:
" In the Dasarathajataka Sita is represented as the sister as well as the
wife of Rama , son of Dasaratha of the Ikshvaku line."
[ Chandra, p.156 ]
Mr. Chandra, who has given the passage cited above, then claims that this
incriminating passage was `infiltrated' by the Buddhist nastikas. This
objection, however, can be discounted immediately. Firstly, it would not be
possible for Buddhists to `distort' a Hindu scripture. Secondly, Chandra
himself is a Brahminist, so his statements in defence of Brahmanism can be
discounted as being the result of religious fanaticism. The fact is, that
the extant Buddhist tales are much older than the Hindu versions, and this
episode was deleted from the later falsified Ramayanas. This is confirmed by
anthropological research showing that incest was institutionalised in Rama's
race, the Ikshvaku dynasty of Aryan Kshatriyas :
" In the Anabattha Sutta and the Mahavastu Avadana we are told that the
Ikshvaku princes, who were banished by their father and took shelter on the
slopes of the Himalayas, and from whom the Sakyas traced their descent,
married their own sisters in order to maintain the purity of their line."
-- [ Chandra, p.155 ]
Hence, it is virtually certain that Sita was Rama's sister, and that it is
certain that such an `upright astik Hindu' as he would not have let his
sister grow beyond the age limit of 8 years prescribed by Aryan law.
Now, what was the main reason for the Brahmins enforcing child marriage and
incest upon the subject populations ? The answer is that these activities
led to the permanent genetic degradation of the non-Brahmin races. It is
well known that consanginuous marriage leads to genetic mutations in the
offspring and eventually ends in the extermination of the blood lineage
concerned. Incest and child marriage has a high risk of leading to
irreversible hereditary defects in the second generation which are then
passed on to succeeding generataions. These were hence convenient methods
for the Brahmins to annihilate the non-Brahmins and establish a pure
Brahmavarta ! Even to this day one finds the process of genetic
deterioration occurring in non-Brahmin children inhabiting Brahmin-ruled
regions. These are entirely the result of Brahmin-enforced child-marriage
and Brahmin-inflicted incest.
1.10 ENFORCEMENT OF VIRGINITY
As a further instance of the oppressive rules of Hinduism imposed upon
women, young girls were required to remain virgin till marriage. Failing
this requirement, they would be discarded by the husbands at will :
Manu.IX.72 : " Though (a man) may have accepted a damsel in due form, he
may abandon (her if she be) blemished, diseased, or deflowered, and (if she
have been) given with fraud."
Such girls were reduced to a pitiable state and were unable to find husbands
thereafter. They were mostly forced to live the life of early wretched
widowhood. This shows that the systematic discrimination meted out by
Hinduism to women extends down to early childhood. Whilst Brahmin men were
free to indulge in debauchery with aboriginal Devadasis at an early age,
girls had to remain chaste virgins. This is the truth about `wonderful'
Hinduism.
These are merely a handful of facts showing that Hinduism is the single most
anti-woman civilization in the history of the world. The followers of
Hinduism are mindless male supremacist pigs who know nothing better than to
burn their own women and rape their own daughters. This they do in the name
of the `Holy Vedas', the invention of perverted Brahmin bigots. No other
religion imposes such an inhuman genocide of women as does the truly beastly
Hinduism.
life-soul of the non-Brahmins. Child marriage of daughters as young 5-6 y
old was common during the Brahmanic Dark Ages due to the custom of dowry [
Nand 17 ] [ Bash.167-8 ] [ Yad 70 ] [ Alt.16 ] [ Ban.70 ]. Lawbooks
prescribe that the best partner for a man in one-third his age. Thus a man
18 year old should marry a girl 6 years old! This is the wonderful wisdom of
the most authoritative Hindu law-book -
Manu.IX.94 : " A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve
who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl of eight years of age; if
(the performance of) his duties would otherwise be impeded, he must marry
sooner."
One of the reasons for such early marriage of girls was to prevent any
scandals. Narada states that some of the defects to be avoided in brides are
if they already had a relationship with another man or have their minds set
on another, they should not be selected [Sheth 67]. This shows that
non-virgin girls could not be married, a custom similar to Church-ruled
medieval Europe.
The custom of child-marriage and child-molesting has divine sanction in
Hinduism. The `great god' Rama was 16 years old when he married Sita, and
Sita was only 14 years old [ Ram.wh 69 ]. However, the age of Sita is now
known to be a forgery; it is almost certain that she was, as per the Manuid
laws, one-third of his age, namely 5 years old. It is inconceivable to
imagine that `great' Rama could have dated to violate the Vedic laws of
Manu. Besides being a child-molester, `holy' Rama was also guilty of incest,
for Sita is referred to in the oldest surviving Ramayanas as his own sister
:
" In the Dasarathajataka Sita is represented as the sister as well as the
wife of Rama , son of Dasaratha of the Ikshvaku line."
[ Chandra, p.156 ]
Mr. Chandra, who has given the passage cited above, then claims that this
incriminating passage was `infiltrated' by the Buddhist nastikas. This
objection, however, can be discounted immediately. Firstly, it would not be
possible for Buddhists to `distort' a Hindu scripture. Secondly, Chandra
himself is a Brahminist, so his statements in defence of Brahmanism can be
discounted as being the result of religious fanaticism. The fact is, that
the extant Buddhist tales are much older than the Hindu versions, and this
episode was deleted from the later falsified Ramayanas. This is confirmed by
anthropological research showing that incest was institutionalised in Rama's
race, the Ikshvaku dynasty of Aryan Kshatriyas :
" In the Anabattha Sutta and the Mahavastu Avadana we are told that the
Ikshvaku princes, who were banished by their father and took shelter on the
slopes of the Himalayas, and from whom the Sakyas traced their descent,
married their own sisters in order to maintain the purity of their line."
-- [ Chandra, p.155 ]
Hence, it is virtually certain that Sita was Rama's sister, and that it is
certain that such an `upright astik Hindu' as he would not have let his
sister grow beyond the age limit of 8 years prescribed by Aryan law.
Now, what was the main reason for the Brahmins enforcing child marriage and
incest upon the subject populations ? The answer is that these activities
led to the permanent genetic degradation of the non-Brahmin races. It is
well known that consanginuous marriage leads to genetic mutations in the
offspring and eventually ends in the extermination of the blood lineage
concerned. Incest and child marriage has a high risk of leading to
irreversible hereditary defects in the second generation which are then
passed on to succeeding generataions. These were hence convenient methods
for the Brahmins to annihilate the non-Brahmins and establish a pure
Brahmavarta ! Even to this day one finds the process of genetic
deterioration occurring in non-Brahmin children inhabiting Brahmin-ruled
regions. These are entirely the result of Brahmin-enforced child-marriage
and Brahmin-inflicted incest.
1.10 ENFORCEMENT OF VIRGINITY
As a further instance of the oppressive rules of Hinduism imposed upon
women, young girls were required to remain virgin till marriage. Failing
this requirement, they would be discarded by the husbands at will :
Manu.IX.72 : " Though (a man) may have accepted a damsel in due form, he
may abandon (her if she be) blemished, diseased, or deflowered, and (if she
have been) given with fraud."
Such girls were reduced to a pitiable state and were unable to find husbands
thereafter. They were mostly forced to live the life of early wretched
widowhood. This shows that the systematic discrimination meted out by
Hinduism to women extends down to early childhood. Whilst Brahmin men were
free to indulge in debauchery with aboriginal Devadasis at an early age,
girls had to remain chaste virgins. This is the truth about `wonderful'
Hinduism.
These are merely a handful of facts showing that Hinduism is the single most
anti-woman civilization in the history of the world. The followers of
Hinduism are mindless male supremacist pigs who know nothing better than to
burn their own women and rape their own daughters. This they do in the name
of the `Holy Vedas', the invention of perverted Brahmin bigots. No other
religion imposes such an inhuman genocide of women as does the truly beastly
Hinduism.