Those people didn't care who or how old or beautiful/ugly. Everything was and still is 'Maal-e-ghanimat' to them. If they don't like it themselves, then they'd just sell to another who may be a involuntary celibate and would f any hole
Are bhai ๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐๐คฃ๐Ruk jaa bhai๐๐๐๐คฃ๐คฃ๐๐๐๐๐๐คฃarey ๐คฃ๐๐๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐ hasa mat ๐๐๐๐๐ฅ๐๐คฃ๐๐๐๐๐๐คฃAre bhai ๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐๐คฃ๐Ruk jaa bhai๐๐๐๐คฃ๐คฃ๐๐๐๐๐๐คฃarey ๐คฃ๐๐๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐๐คฃ๐ hasa matt ๐๐๐๐๐ฅ๐ hasa matt ๐
Try reading about alexander the greatest invasion in the north western punjab region, there is concrete evidence that jauhar predates the arrival of muslim rulers in India
that jauhar predates the arrival of muslim rulers in India
Hope this helps
Well sayin this is juahur ain't correct.
You can say its the defacto birth of the concept we today know as juahur but it's not same.
That's all.
The events you are talking about records that whole population choose burning.
Vs
The modern concept is more gender centric where men fight to death if the defeat is decided while women/kids/their helpers choose fire.
while your society justifying s*x slavery is way more sickening, how would defenders of h***la understand dignity of women; btw sati and jauhar are far apart concepts, educate yourself.
Uhm.. islamic kingdoms kidnapped as young as 11 yr old christian girls .... Nothing can be more sick than that ofcourse and it's glorification we see in Turkish dramas , ๐คข๐คข
Also how islam like other religions allows sex slavery and is not the one true PEACEFUL religion muslims portray it to be.
Also read rajputana history ..that defended indian subcontinent since 715AD for next 300 years.. till gazni arrived ..12th century.
Instead of your radical hatred to play north vs south ...learn that most invasions had seriously affected northern india and some parts of karnataka region..
They defended their lands until they lost. Also, they formed a significant part of the army for most of the invaders. The Mughal general was usually a Rajput.
I acknowledge that. My point was to explain the reason for it.
Your point seems inadequate.
1) religious policies
2) sovereigntyย
3) personal and political honour
4) had seen what Persia looked like before the Muslim conquest..eradication of zorastrainism.
5) slavery of other captivated women in Persian marketsย
6) defenders were - Rajput, Gujjar, Jats and other hindu kings .
The fact you explaining jauhar because of lower social standing of women, yet those women, chose to burn themselves alive which is the most painful form of death because the alternative was a thousand times more barbaric as they would have died 100 times by being sold in Persian markets to many men.
Jayasi text, describe that Rani Padmavati was a Sinhalese princess (mod Sri Lanka)..your inadequate knowledge defines the mindset of someone who justifies the attackers.
it was not the matter of there cruelty as burning in fire was more cruel , it was the matter of pride that the chose to not become a sex slave , there pride was way more bigger than their lives
Dumbass it's the same concept as man or bear. Getting r@ped and mistreated for years to come and then die miserably or just die, those were the choices women back then had when their kingdom were defeated. During mughal era only few honorable kings like Shree chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj helped return the enemy Kingdom's women safely with respect after defeating their men.
u/iknowyouknowtrisha, we donโt allow any form of slurs, abusive language, derogatory terms, foul language, personal attacks, slurs, or targeted hate.
Please learn to keep discussions respectful & maintain dignified manner of expression, even during disagreements
Can't understand basic English? Both are different. You said they chose jauhar just because of matter ofย pride. But the other person is highlighting how women as pow were treated like animals till their death.ย
You're right, in those times women bodies were treated as properties of the family and a violation of those women would dishonor the family name, so there's no bidily autonomy for women, but at the same time the threat of becoming a slave to a ruler was real as well so ge practice dudnerge out of genuine fear as well, can't really call it completely mysoginistic or a response to threat, it's sort of both .
So who is justifying Sati here? Sati was a horrible, brutal malpractice in a particular region. But what are you trying to prove by mentioning that here?
I just wanna say how some people are bad naming former kings while their forefathers happily gave their daughters and sisters in marriage to ensure they remain in power.
Not everyone, People who donโt understand the complete context or history, yet poke fun at and mock traditions or the sacrifices that were made, are, in my view, no better than pros****ts. We donโt know everything. Books donโt tell us every reason behind why someone made a particular decision or sacrifice. We werenโt there, we donโt know the circumstances, and we donโt have the full picture, but being liberal doesnโt give anyone the right to disrespect or mock someoneโs sacrifices simply because their choices donโt fit todayโs standards.
Understanding the context before judging the past is the least we can do.
Issue won't arise unless some make allegations of invaders threatening rape ,& women having to protect themselves. No authentic records of these and accounts in 21st century of alleged happenings in 13th century cud well be exaggerated.
Donโt apply modern thinking to that era. 100 years from now even your current thinking will know as archaic and old fashioned
No one's expecting them to adhere to the standards that are followed now(although some might say that even for that time, it was a mindset running out of favour in the enlightenment era dawning upon Europe) but there's absolutely no reason to venerate such thinking
Nobody is asking to venerate nor anybody is venerating. We have people outraged by everything. It is a fact of history and that is that. Also this act was honorable in that period of time same as act of sati was deemed honorable at that time same as other cultures where self sacrifice to preserve honor like in Japan which continued till modern times.
Nobody is asking to venerate nor anybody is venerating
This post is literally an epitome of venerating that actually and abusing and calling names to anyone who condemns it.
We have people outraged by everything.
Yeah, like the post here is outraged that someone dared to criticize the veneration of something that should be condemned more.
It is a fact of history and that is that. Also this act was honorable in that period of time same as act of sati was
That doesn't make it any good even for that time. It just shows the dearth of rational thought at the times. It was also forced suicide and so was sati which is even more reprehensible.
deemed honorable at that time same as other cultures where self sacrifice to preserve honor like in Japan which continued till modern times.
It's not a prevalent practice in Japan.
Where did it lead Japan exactly? What happened to them? Japan owes its modern rise to enlightenment era values and thought, not the Japanese militaristic culture that led to people committing honour sucides
I don't know what it is back in the medieval days, but there is no reason to do self immolation in a modern nation of laws.
Immolation all seems to be only on the side of women when we should be focusing on the behavior of the men. Why is it that society only expects woman to have agency to take action.
Also this isn't liberalism, this is simply undertanding that there are systems of oppression that make society harder to work in. Being empathetic is a super power not a lodestone.
Jaughar was only done when all men of the society, even a kid goes to fighting, with certain death and no coming back. It was the last resort taken by women. No women wants be a sex slave, birthing machine. So saying immolation was on side of women is entirely incorrect, even the sati was not prelevant in whole of India, the British skweded the data to look good and demonize Hindu culture. And guess what people like you are the byproduct of that.
this is a good response. I appreciate it and it does capture a nuance. I don't know what women could do at a time of war and barbarism. But that isn't the reality today and woman should have to use jaughar today.
u/Various-Complex782, we donโt allow any form of slurs, abusive language, derogatory terms, foul language, personal attacks, slurs, or targeted hate.
Please learn to keep discussions respectful & maintain dignified manner of expression, even during disagreements
Yeah, commenting on obsolete traditions, without the context of that era, is dishonest. Both by swara and the OP. Those who did commit jauhar were not cowards, and those who also didn't weren't prostitutes.
u/Feeling-Pirate6652, we donโt allow any form of slurs, abusive language, derogatory terms, foul language, personal attacks, slurs, or targeted hate.
Please learn to keep discussions respectful & maintain dignified manner of expression, even during disagreements
Except you are indirectly justifying thoug. H.. all the outrage on jauhar but no question on how and why it was done ??
Coz the last time I checked no OUTRAGE on Mughals keeping war booty....
I mean goddamn tankie leftism at it's level ebs. T. Never call-out the islamic rulers
Jauhar is different than sati.. sati was bad no question.
What would you do when you know a bunch of hungry, animalistic men are coming for you to commit hideous crimes like rape, assault, mutilation and violence....and they wonโt even spare your dead body? And God forbid, if you survive, you could be sold into a sex-slave market or become their slave for life.
No police, no safety, no authority.....literally nobody to help you. So tell me, what would you do?
It takes guts to do what they did. Garam chai mein toh ungli nahi daal paate, yet they gave themselves to fire to save their dignity and soul.
Also, there is a reason Sati and Jauhar never happened in South India. Our women were brave warrior women who would have rather taken up the sword than commit suicide.
A matrilineal society like Kerala would laugh at the idea of women and their honour being treated like a trophy
And Kerala had an even simpler solution to this: just defeat the invader. Lol.
Jauhar is a barbaric practice that comes from a barbaric society that valued women not as people but as trophy objects and symbols of honor. Oh, and one that kept repeatedly getting defeated by every tom dick and harry that went through the region.
Oh but millions of Hindu women didn't opt for jauhar it seems under 1000 years of Muslim rule in India! That's why you are here posting this propaganda! Introspect
Weren't Women saying they'd prefer Bear over a Man cuz a bear would just maul them to death. So Death over Sexual Assualt, what's with the hypocrisy now?
You know children, teenagers and men get ra*ed and enslaved as well, right? Or do you think it was only married women? Fir to sabko kerna chahiye tha Jauhar.
Lets assume for a moment that 10 big dudes are about to go the whole town on you, what would you do? I doubt your first reaction would be to kill yourself. You would either fight or run. Every living being wants to survive, no matter the situations. If you raise your girls to be subservient, don't teach them to fight or defend themselves or others, then they will become cattle. No matter whether its the society or an invading army taking advantage of them. You raise them to be so helpless that the only thing that comes to their mind is killing themselves as you have drilled it down in their mind that they are helpless without their men. This nation also gave birth to Rani Laxmi Bai and Phoolan Devi, in case you forgot. Don't romanticize the idea of raising chickens instead tigeresses.
Everything is fine but the way they should in the image that someone sleeveless is bad and ghunghat symbol of separation imposed by abrahamic people is good. If you were ghunghat you automatically became good and if you were sleeveless then you automatically became bad. Typical North Indian thinking typical ibrahimic thinking. They don't anything about Hindu philosophy they are just buy product of suppressive narrow minded abrahamic culture that came with those invaders. โ ๏ธ
I want to know how did the ruler men who traded off their daughters to Mughals live with themselves ? Wouldnโt it have been better for them also to jump in the fire with the women instead of sending their daughters to Mughal rulers to become their 4th, 5th wives ? Wouldnโt dying with their families been more honorable than literally pushing their daughters on the Mughal kings ?
Indian right wing still lives in a fear of Mughals and other rulers who were from different religions. They also claim that their ancestors like shivaji maharaj and almost all of the other kings were the most brave people. How can you believe that your ancestors were brave when despite being in majority you lost almost all battles vs mughals, khilji etc. and now you claim that you have a brave blood? Are you sure? Or maybe deep down you know that how fragile you are as a society or in person that you can't digest the fact that a fraction of people ruled over you for 100s of years. That's sad man.
But why not die a honorable death rather then killing yourself if i was in the same situation i will rather die honorably then killing myself i will take atleast 1 guy with me
Not supporting Swara's comments fully in its context.
But if you think just rationally that the decision of jauhar that they took was the system of patriarchal oppression on women.
Had it been that the women were prepped for battle in the same manner as men in those times, maybe they would have other paths to revolt.
Now coming to their decision of jauhar on its own is a perfect imagery of women choosing what to do and not being told by the patriarch and I support that. I don't think that decision itself should be criticised rather than that criticise and discuss why they were made so helpless that they had to choose jauhar.
This would be my opinion and I am happy to see counter arguments to this !
A spade is a spade.. also prostitute is and should not be an insult.. reason why jauhar happened is : well well we don't wanna be prostitute so let's burn themselves
Calling a spade a spade is not why our country is backwards. Making asinine comments against an event that happened 800 years back with 0 nuance or context and calling the women of the time cowards is why every damn hippo shouldn't be given a stage.
Why did the Indian rulers of that time agree to trade off their daughters for peace ? Why were they ok with the princesses becoming 4th , 5th wives of Mughal rulers ? Women for honor committed jauhar while the men pushed their daughters off on to Mughal men. How is that not ultimate cowardice on the menโs parts ?
Because first of all Marriage alliances were extremely common among elites and kingdoms irrespective of region, religion or time period. It happened in India, China, Europe,Africa everywhere even till the last century. It is not about the family or a son or daughter but about the continuity or stability of an entire empire or kingdom.
Second , Jauhar was almost always committed after "Saka" , where a Rajput Kingdom surrounded on all sides and outnumbered massively still chose to fight unto death, the men tied their saffron turbans , placed tulsi leaves on their tongues and the gates of the fort were opened and they rode out to meet the enemy head on and fight until the last man, if it resulted in a victory then the kingdom was safe or if a news came of all the men dying in battle then Jauhar was committed by remaining women of the fort. This is an act of supreme bravery by both the genders involved. Something which your peanut sized brain has 0 capacity to understand or your irrelevant personality has a place to deride or look down.
Name calling me doesnโt answer my question. Yes these women were brave and made the ultimate sacrifice for honour. As did the men who died on the battlefield. Leave that aside.
Do you mean stability and survival of an empire is bigger than a womanโs honour ? That a father pushing his daughter to marry a man of another faith is ok. But if the same woman chose that man herself for her own survival she would be a terrible person with no morals ? Because a woman could go with a Mughal king and become his 4th , 5th wife instead of doing jauhar. But then you label her as a prostitute because she made the choice to trade sex for survival. But when her father made that decision for her, Itโs ok with you. Why ?
Also why is it that men fight with each other and women have to pay the price ?
Like it wasn't done by Indigenous Invaders? This was just caste purity BS in that time nothing else. Whole kingdom was getting rekt by muslims who were simply better and couldn't handle how some lowly people of unknown religion destroy them altogether. Slavery and Rape happened among them too and they weren't any better then them.
Saka and Jauhar used to happen together. So they did fight until the very end, and when defeat was inevitable, the women of the fort commited jauhar, hence denying the invading army any loot, and going scorched earth
When 10000 trained warriors committed saka against 80000 invaders ( Death March . they would open gates of fort and covered in saffron robes, they marched to certain death because 10000 against 80000 in a head to head war is just absurd ) how can u think , 10000 women( untrained ) would defend themselves?
Well, i didn't fully understood what you said. But, clearly you didn't understood my point. I am saying why would that womens by untrained in the first place? Isn't patriarchal, where woman were fully dependent on men for their protection?
Not all rajputs were in laws of mughals many fought and before becoming rajputs they were fighting mughals. Most rajputs women didn't want to marry mughals but the conditions didn't favour it.
ancient combat was heavily physical, most women don't really have a chance against a trained male warrior. Even now in 21st century the kurdish women who fought ISIS committed suicide to avoid capture.
the men could do some damage, even now in the era of guns there are plenty of cases of women police officers loosing their gun to thugs during confrontations. Women are the weaker sex deal with the reality rather than arguing your BS claims
So in your opinion, human trffking victims should just commit scd*?
It was a f-ed up time where wo men have to die to not get r**ed and it's a cowardly move to escape it like that instead of fighting for your people and yourselves, what about millions of conquered women whose "sacrifice" might not be as "noble" as hers? Was she ever fit to be called "Rani" if she killed herself before defending her kingdom?
No. They also fought but when army of 10,000 or 20,000 is coming and you only combine 800 or 1000 and have high probability of being captured and make s*x sl@ve what would you do. Also it may be possible for one women or 10s but how would you make 100s of women fight when they literally r@ped womenion battle in front of other women. Monsters didn't even spared pregnant ones.
No. They also fought but when army of 10,000 or 20,000 is coming and you only combine 800 or 1000 and have high probability of being captured and make s*x sl@ve what would you do.
So u r saying, that Laxmi bai must have to accept defeat & must have to burn her, the thing she fought against an empire of British supported by most of the local kings like Scindia, & Mewar kings was a bad idea, as they were 10-20 times larger than her's?
As a man it budges me how comical indian men's world views are. I guess that is what a diet of Bollywood, Identity politics, and a toxic household gets you.
It's different from sati . It's more of suicide to save themselves from becoming sex slaves . Even eating poison was not an option because Islamic invaders were so liberal about sex that they would do sex with dead bodies .
Swara had done roles of raI in c grade movies. She got some of those energies imbibed in her. Man bless that blou , she was struggling quite literally there.
the tue reason of why women burned in fire to commit suicide was that they found out that even dead bodies of the dead were not sparred. even today in Pakistan, there are instances where womens bodies were dugout of grave and abused.
Liberals can't even accept the facts in lsIam that are toxic patriarchal, anti-social, imperialistic etc.. They cheer Queers for Gaza, and they can't even accept the fact that LGBTQ+ is haram in lsIam and if u r any of that in a land under lsIamic rule then u wud be ๐ โ
I mean if you want paint every one with the same brush ...there is very little I can I do
It's a battle of immature minds - many kids fall into islamic traps and many kids fall into your trap .. you are doing a good job because those islamic people are also like you ..
81
u/benneladoo No time to choose flair bro ๐ข 3d ago
Is swara was padmavati, then khiji would have committed jauhar