Brhadārankyaka Upanishad 6.4.9,21

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how can I explain so that you understand? Condemnation is easy but understanding is the thing to be aimed for because only with understanding can we make an evaluation.

As far as I know, the original text is long gone so there is no way now of knowing the original intent but on the face of it, there is rape.

How do you apologize for the verses in the OT saying women are worth 30 shekels but men 50? What am I misunderstanding there?

The OT legitimizes women as chattel, owned by the father till she is wed then owned by the husband instead, to do with as he pleases.

How different is that to the verses listed here?

The takeaway for me in both cases: neither were inspired or written by any deity. Instead it codified the treatment and societal level of women strictly put down by men who were in power and wanted to keep it that way.

Originally posted by sonhouse
As far as I know, the original text is long gone so there is no way now of knowing the original intent but on the face of it, there is rape.

How do you apologize for the verses in the OT saying women are worth 30 shekels but men 50? What am I misunderstanding there?

The OT legitimizes women as chattel, owned by the father till she is wed then owned by ...[text shortened]... husband instead, to do with as he pleases.

How different is that to the verses listed here?

Its easy men were worth more cause they could do more work. To a society that was agricultural this makes sense. I mean how hard can it be?

Yes on the face of it, my point exactly, thankyou for the unintended irony·

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Its easy men were worth more cause they could do more work. To a society that was agricultural this makes sense. I mean how hard can it be?

So you are then part of the problem. Women are on a lower level than men in your society.
There is no other way to say it. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.......

I'm sure you will follow up with verse after verse extolling the virtues of women, just don't let them be your boss, no matter HOW much more intelligent a given woman is or how much experience they have. They will NEVER be your boss.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you are then part of the problem. Women are on a lower level than men in your society.
There is no other way to say it. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.......

I'm sure you will follow up with verse after verse extolling the virtues of women, just don't let them be your boss, no matter HOW much more intelligent a given woman is or how much experience they have. They will NEVER be your boss.

Why do you feel the necessity to instantly moralise over other people because they explain a Bible verse to you? Its the most curious phenomena.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
how can I explain so that you understand? Condemnation is easy but understanding is the thing to be aimed for because only with understanding can we make an evaluation.

What is there to understand further than what the text says and Dasa's own explaination of it? You defend marital rape so it is of no surprise to me that you would defend this also.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why do you feel the necessity to instantly moralise over other people because they explain a Bible verse to you? Its the most curious phenomena.

Are you saying sonhouse should not find these verses and Dasa's explaining morally reprehensible?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Why do you feel the necessity to instantly moralise over other people because they explain a Bible verse to you? Its the most curious phenomena.

If anyone wants to 'explain' a bible verse or a Veda verse, l invite the deity involved to explain it to me personally. Outside of that, humans attempting to tell me the ultimate 'truth' is not going to work.

I WILL listen to a genuine deity. Human's? Not so much. I trust them about as far as I can throw them and they are getting heavier and heavier as time goes by and I am getting weaker and weaker as time goes by.

NEVER TRUST A HUMAN TO TELL YOU ABOUT SPIRITUALITY.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I must say that I am deeply disappointed in the forum because not a single person took the opportunity to attempt to understand the text

Can we take it that you are equally disappointed in yourself for also not doing so?
I must note here that my own comment are based solely on what Dasa himself said, not what the original text says (which I really could not care less about).

How predictable and how banal.
Pointing out to Dasa that he supports rape is 'banal'?

1. Dasa may have a legitimate claim to the translation. How many here understand Sanskrit? If we do not then me must take it upon trust that what is translated is accurate.
Nonsense. We do not have to trust anyone with regards to the translation. Our ignorance of Sanskrit does not automatically make Dasas translation correct.

Furthermore there may be terms that have no direct correlation with an English equivalent.
True. But irrelevant. I think we can all readily admit that the translation my not be accurate.

2. The text may by spurious or apocryphal, a later interpolation. From what I have read some consider that there is no sixth chapter and the verse in question looks very suspect because it does not deal with Vedic ritual like the preceding chapters.
Dasa claims the Vedas are perfect in every way. I bet you won't accept similar excuses about ridiculous Bible verses.

Now before you commit the same mistake and start to instantly moralise over me may I suggest that instead you seek simply to understand the position.
I understand your position. You believe the text may be incorrectly translated or out of context and we should therefore not too easily jump to conclusions about the original text. On that I agree. However, you yourself have jumped to conclusions with regards to my position and incorrectly assumed that I have criticized the original text.

One again is reminded of the noble game in that the more one gains in understanding the less dogmatic one is likely to be.
You still have a long way to go.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Can we take it that you are equally disappointed in yourself for also not doing so?
I must note here that my own comment are based solely on what Dasa himself said, not what the original text says (which I really could not care less about).

[b]How predictable and how banal.
Pointing out to Dasa that he supports rape is 'banal'?

1. Dasa may ...[text shortened]... ns in understanding the less dogmatic one is likely to be.
You still have a long way to go.[/b]

What Dasa said holds no interest for me because I am interested in the original text and why the forum failed to consider any of the details that I mentioned in evaluating it. Instead they simply used it as a pretext to vilify Dasa and latterly me when I pointed out their failure.

Also the proclivity for others to simply condemn and moralise over others is very disappointing although I understand that its the easiest course of action to take because it requires virtually no effort.

here is a summation of their arguments in condensed form.

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Forum -You are a rape apologist like Dasa. (FMF, divesgeester, sonhouse)

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Forum -You are wrong (Ghost of a duke)

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Froum - I am interested in what Dasa says (twhitehead)

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What Dasa said holds no interest for me because I am interested in the original text and why the forum failed to consider any of the details that I mentioned in evaluating it. Instead they simply used it as a pretext to vilify Dasa and latterly me when I pointed out their failure.

Also the proclivity for others to simply condemn and moralise over ...[text shortened]... nderstand that its the easiest course of action to take because it requires virtually no effort.

"The forum" has been responding to the translation of the text that Dasa offered and to what Dasa said as he sought to justify the words he posted.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What Dasa said holds no interest for me because I am interested in the original text .

Well then it is on your head to try and understand the original text. Don't give that responsibility to others just because you are too lazy to do your own work.

and why the forum failed to consider any of the details that I mentioned in evaluating it.
I for one failed to consider them because I couldn't care less what the original text said.

Instead they simply used it as a pretext to vilify Dasa and latterly me when I pointed out their failure.
Given that Dasa support rape and genocide, I think it only right to vilify him and right to vilify you should you try to defend him.

Also the proclivity for others to simply condemn and moralise over others is very disappointing
If perfectly reasonable to moralize over people that advocate genocide and try to excuse rape. If you find that disappointing then I find you disappointing.

although I understand that its the easiest course of action to take because it requires virtually no effort.
It is also, incidental, the correct course of action. But I understand your stance given your long history of trying to justify distasteful verses in the Bible and the actions of your organization with regards to rape.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
here is a summation of their arguments in condensed form.

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Forum -You are a rape apologist like Dasa. (FMF, divesgeester, sonhouse)

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Forum -You are wrong (Ghost of a duke)

Robbie -You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Froum - I am interested in what Dasa says (twhitehead)

All correct arguments. Do you disagree with any of them? If so, explain why.

Are you not a rape apologist?
Do you have evidence that Ghost of duke did not consider the alternatives?
Do you have any evidence that I am interested in the original text?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
What Dasa said holds no interest for me because I am interested in the original text and why the forum failed to consider any of the details that I mentioned in evaluating it. Instead they simply used it as a pretext to vilify Dasa and latterly me when I pointed out their failure.

Also the proclivity for others to simply condemn and moralise over ...[text shortened]... e - You have failed to considered any alternatives.
Forum - You are a rape apologist like Dasa.

You have only provided a broad conjecture as to why the very clear words in the OP and the explaination Dasa gave, who I'm sure is more of a Vedic expert than you, do not promote rape. You have not provided categorical evidence that the words written in the OP and certainly those written by dasa do not promote rape.

You have a reputation in here for failing to navigate the moral boundaries of rape. And here you are again, defending the indefensible and trying to present yourself as a voice of moderation.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well then it is on your head to try and understand the original text. Don't give that responsibility to others just because you are too lazy to do your own work.

[b]and why the forum failed to consider any of the details that I mentioned in evaluating it.
I for one failed to consider them because I couldn't care less what the original text said. ...[text shortened]... stify distasteful verses in the Bible and the actions of your organization with regards to rape.[/b]

Yes you are correct of course that I should research the subject but I have not tried to defend Dasa. All I have stated is that his calling into question the validity of the translation me have some validity itself for reasons that I have cited but this is not a defence of him nor of his personal views.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes you are correct of course that I should research the subject but I have not tried to defend Dasa. All I have stated is that his calling into question the validity of the translation me have some validity itself for reasons that I have cited but this is not a defence of him nor of his personal views.

Have you condemned Dasa's endorsement of rape as depicted in the words he himself posted to this thread?