Talk:Women in Hinduism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ensquared. Peer reviewers: Vnguyen518, Efoxman42, Annkat22, Lnicholson14.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Review

I think that you have done a great job on this article! You put a lot of thought into your contributions and have successfully changed some of the bad wording and headers on your page. The few recommendations I have are that you could provide more information in your education section as well as a few more sources to support your claims. If you provide additional sources, your entire article would be much more well-rounded in the sections that you have edited. Also, I would recommend that you add more description to smaller linked topics throughout your additions to improve readability. If you could give brief explanations into the topics that you cover throughout the sections you have edited, it would allow the reader to continue on with your writing more fluidly, without having to constantly stop to look up a link. However, the links that you have provided are very helpful. Great job on these edits! Annkat22 (talk) 04:53, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

polyandry in hinduism

I have added information which tells that Hindu women can marry up to ten husbands. Sourcing is clear and practice is supported by Hindu texts. Thank youSmatrah (talk) 11:15, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

So you are making up conclusion after reading a website that has provided some translation of text? That's WP:OR. You need such interpretation to be supported by a reliable source. Also stop repeating what has been already noted on Women in Hinduism#The Epics. Capitals00 (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

capital! please review it is not just translation. text along with sources is below. it is a well known published source.

Draupadi with her five husbands - the Pandavas. The central figure is Yudhishthira; the two to his left are Bhima and Arjuna . Nakula and Sahadeva, the twins, are to his right. Their wife, at far right, is Draupadi. Deogarh, Dasavatar temple.

There is at least one reference to polyandry in the ancient Hindu epic Mahabharata. Draupadi married the five Pandava brothers, as this is what she chose in a previous life. This ancient text is accepting this as her way of life. However, in the same epic, when questioned by Kunti to give an example of polyandry, Yudhishthira cites Gautam-clan Jatila (married to seven Saptarishis) and Hiranyaksha's sister Pracheti (married to ten brothers), thereby implying a more open attitude toward polyandry in Vedic society.ot

and hence your claim of WP:OR is baseless and false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smatrah (talk • contribs)

You are still writing your own interpretation of the translations in place of backing it with a reliable source. Read WP:OR very carefully. Capitals00 (talk) 04:40, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

References

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• '1' Sun Temple Konark Temple, Kama Love Orissa India February 2014.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Article in POV shambles

This article has certainly been tainted by a lot of POV. While the first line may say there is conflict on position of women in Hindu texts, most of the article omits any reference to something that might be deemed negative. Many times it diverted to containing contradictory or unsourced text.

Now earlier [1] the article claimed Sati did not exist until the 2nd millennium CE. Despite sources like Brick David's "The Dharmasastric Debate on Widow Burning" p. 205 and Anand A. Yang's "Women and Social Reform in Modern India: A Reader" (pages 20-21) mentioning its existence in first millenium CE. ALso it earlier used Narada Smriti to claim Hindu scriptures do not prescribe punishment for adultery.

Brick David also mentions sati as sahgamana, where a wife sacrifices herself on pyre: "It is, therefore, fairly certainly that sahagamana was a Brahmanical custom current in at least parts of Kashmir during second half of first millennium CE."

Anand A. Yang describes it started becoming popular later in 1st millennium: "Increasingly, however, in the first millennium AD, for instance, in the popular texts of later Hinduism, the Puranas, sati is mentioned as an option for widows."

We should also add to this the fact that earliest evidences of Sati are far older than second millennium, dating as far as 5th century in Nepal and 6th century in India. Widow-burning is documented by Megasthenes too.

The article also unncessarily included theories about Sati. Most of all it only included one in detail, the Muslim invasions to suggest this practice only took root during the period of conquests. "The earliest Islamic invasions of South Asia have been recorded from early 8th century CE, such as the raids of Muhammad bin Qasim, and major wars of Islamic expansion after the 10th century.[101] This chronology has led to the theory that the increase in sati practice in India may be related to the centuries of Islamic invasion and its expansion in South Asia.[102]"

I did not find any mention of sati or dowry in Volume 100 of "Encyclopaedia Indica: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh". But the text was copied from an earlier version of the article Sati (practice), [2] and the book is only available for a snippet view, being very expensive, I doubt anyone actually read it. Andre Wink never mentions Sati in "Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam: 7th-11th Centuries". No other theory that may say another thing was mentioned, this clearly shows this was a POV-infected section.

Further this article under the part about "Adultery" claimed that Hindu texts contain no punishment for adultery. Contrary to this I know that many of them do, including Narada Smriti itself as said so by Upinder Singh . This is the same scripture used here earlier to claim

Another book "Irreverence and the Sacred: Critical Studies in the History of Religions" Hugh Urban & Greg Johnson mentions far worse punishments existent in Arthashastra and some Dhamsastras, inluding capital punishment.

I've gone on to remove all of this false POV and added what reliable academics say in their place. There is far more to be done however. 125.62.104.135 (talk) 14:31, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

References

An article that exemplifies POV Pushing.

As another user has already states, this article seems to be replete with POV pushing , one example in which the editors have given Verses from Hindu scriptures that praise women (which is not the problem here) but at the same time have conveniently glossed over verses that deride women , and that too from the same scriptures !

Here are some examples :

" Indra himself hath said, The mind of woman brooks not discipline,

 Her intellect hath little weight."

Source:http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Rig_Veda/Mandala_8/Hymn_33

"With women there can be no lasting friendship:

hearts of hyenas are the hearts of women."

Source:http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Rig_Veda/Mandala_10/Hymn_95

"Day and night woman must be kept in dependence by the males (of) their (families), and, if they attach themselves to sensual enjoyments, they must be kept under one's control."

" Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independence "

Source:https://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/manu/manu09.htm

"If she is not willing, he should buy her over; and if she is still unyielding, he should strike her with a stick or with the hand and proceed, uttering the following Mantra, ‘I take away your reputation,’ etc. She is then actually discredited." Source:https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/the-brihadaranyaka-upanishad/d/doc122237.html

and so much more.

Meanwhile the article "Women in Buddhism" is well balanced given the fact that both favourable and unfavourable verses on women are cited.

The wiki article also states "Scholars state that Vedic-era Hindu texts and records left by travelers to ancient and medieval India suggest that ancient and early medieval Hindu society did not practice Dowry or Sati. These practices likely became widespread sometime in the 2nd millennium CE from socio-political developments in the Indian subcontinent".

This is blatant POV pushing, given the fact that there are scholarly research and historical records that indicate that Sati was a widely practiced by Vedic followers in the Pre-Christian, BC era !

" It is Aristobulus of Cassandria, who wrote a history of his expedition with Alexander. Aristobulus according to Strabo, at first refers to two Hindu sophists or ascetics whom he met at Taxila and then to " some strange and unusual customs of the people of Taxila."l Strabo then says : " The dead are thrown out to be devoured by vultures. To have many wives is a custom common to these and to other nations. He (Aristobulus) says, that he had heard, from some persons, of """wives burning themselves""" voluntarily with their deceased husbands; and that those women who refused to submit to this custom were disgraced. The same things have been told by other writers."

Source:http://crossasia-repository.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/4023/1/The%20Antiquity%20of%20the%20custom%20of%20sati.pdf

It's about time this nonsensical POV pushing is stopped and the article is rectified from such bias. Bodhiupasaka (talk) 06:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)