Nonsense ....You are talking about ..... Shankracharya uesd to say that "Caste is necessary" ..... Manusmriti is the most unnecessary book on the earth.....
@@AGRIUNNYAN when Sankaracharya said about this and What Manusmriti Says about caste haa what it says .There was no Caste but Varna .we People of West Bengal and Orissa Still follow Varna not Caste because British Constructed Caste never affected us unlike Other states .Same Britishers did with Tutsis and Hutis ans Rawanda Genocide Happened same with Srilanka Civil war . Manusmriti is 1000 times better than Bible and Quran or other religions books !
@@AyushBose-gk2xg Manusmriti better'for you but that book exploits our people or Shankracharya......... Casteism is one of the most toxic things for society ...The person who is never able understand that never faced....Come Gwalior at village of Raipur, ghantigo, dabra, bhitarbar ....I will show you but sarvan idiots doing with his neighbours...... 🙏🙏
1:01:06 jb ghtiya bato ki bat aaye to, ye to har dhrm me hota hai, or kuchh achhi bate mil jaye to, ye achhi bate bhi to hai hmare dhrm me, Bhai achhi bate to hadis me bhi hai, is se kya islam ki hadis ki wo ghtiya bato ko justify kr skte hai, same in Hinduism
Well this is what you get on podcasts! lots of logical sounding questions but hardly any counter question on answers given. He is just another J Sai dipak in making (with better looks).
After listening to the conversation between Bhargava and Vimoh, it seems to me that the former has quite a bit of thinking yet to do, when it comes to engaging with another's belief systems. Philosophy is not the same ballpark as mathematics or physics, since it deals with the subjective experience, rather than objective reality. You can measure the hypotenuse of a right triangle, and conclude it's relationship with it's sides, and that relationship holds true every time, but you cannot so simply measure what's going on in somebody's mind, and what they mean when they use certain words. For that you need to communicate. Sorry, but philosophers do not have the authority to define what atheism is, and impose it as an absolute to be taught to everyone. Language is a far bigger beast than can be caged in the confines of any academic circle. Language is not absolute; it needs no authority, only a common understanding. One may use "weight" and "mass" differently when dealing with physical formulae, but for the average person, they are functionally the same, i.e the amount of substance in a body. Whether or not gravity is acting on it, is inconsequential when we are all affected primarily by the same source of gravity. It seems to me that Bhargava was simply playing semantic games on that front, and I don't see any utility in that. Words do not have absolute meaning. We give them meaning, which transform with place and time, and the many faces that speak their mind. If you are a serious philosopher, then you must consider this while communicating, because your field deals with understanding ideas and beliefs, not imposing them. Also, you cannot alleviate the burden of proof by framing theism as "lacking belief that god does not exist", because the statement does not necessarily describe a theistic position. It is the negation of gnostic atheism, aka, a positive belief that god does not exist. Both agnostic atheists as well as theists can make such a stament. Fact remains, that the concept of a "god" must be proposed to even begin believing, or not believing. "I lack a belief that XYZ does not exist." Okay, sure, but "What is XYZ? How do you know about it, and what makes you not believe that it doesn't exist? What difference does it make to how you live?" are the important questions here, to which there may be a spectrum of answers. And I think we lose out on that spectrum, if we box ourselves into fixed academic definitions, or rigid structures of logic. For instance, a coin may land on heads or tails in an expected situation, but if Schrodinger's Samurai shows up out of nowhere and chops it in half, one may find that one half lands on heads nd the other on tails. In this case, our variables are limited, and we haven't considered the samurai. In Bhargava's example with the silver ring, of god being defined as being both the material and the manufacturer, he is engaging in an imaginary exercise. There can be countless other imaginary exercises such as that, like the concept of cyclical time, rather than linear time, which can turn the chain of contingencies into a loop of events, thereby solving infinite regress. We can concieve of dimensions beyond our perception, where infinite regress does not apply. We may not be able to fathom it, but we can propose it. God is but one such proposal, and by simply defining it, it does not become true. We have a frame of reference for silver rings, and coins, and samurais, but not for what lies beyond the veil of observation. As such we can only speculate, and it's important to communicate our speculations, and figure out what exactly whe believe, and why, because it affects our lives, as well as the lives of those around us. And we cannot do that by conflating philosophy to the same standards of objectivity as physics, because frankly, everyone has their own individualistic philosophy, which serves them for better or worse. One needn't have studied the mental masturbators and orgasmic orators of ages past to have sound reasoning, and those that have done so, may not have reasoning that is quite as sound. Studying philosophy may give you perspective, but not necessarily hard facts, like scientific subjects do.
@@metalman4393 agreed. Watching that debate/discussion was really hard. Bhargav claims he is a "local atheist" when asked to defend the idea of hindu gods, at the same time he was defending ideas from Shrutis and Smritis. He was trying to Trojan horse Vedanta philosophy as Panpsychism. Also, played the game of semantics when it suited him. Absolutely a deceiver. After watching this podcast I know he is not a good faith actor
@@electrondynamics9721 It's vimohs atheist hour #264 : Caste, privilege and brainwashing, starting at 53 minutes. Some channels auto-delete links, so sharing title instead.
@@sudeepheni6016 Newton, Galileo, Descartes, Einstein, Nikola Tesla these are some biggest scientific minds in the history of human kind who beloved in God . Do you think you have better view of world and it's function than them. You are just nobody 😂. Do you know that Newton and Einstein are considered to be the most revolutionary scientist of all time.
Budhha's teaching had nothing to do with caste....people weren't divided even on the basis of their occupation.... buddhhhiiiiizzzzzaaaam mein bhi caaaassstteee hai saaarrrrrr......
Vinayapitaka IV 6 enumerates jatis. In fact same scripture calling an ordinary monk as having come from hina jaati is tantamounts to abusing him and calling him names There are criterias for testing dignities of monk on basis of jaati. Paccittya II.
Sati existed before the Mughal too on large scale, and there are records of forced sati too. If a woman somehow lives the widows were treated very badly, and it's recommanded to go sati, as it also provided prestige to the family. Also, weather going by force or groomed in a way so they will do it by her choice, it is till a immoral thing to exist. stop lying
@@revisehigh Yes, "before the mughal" so, i will provide all the records before the Mughal or contemporary. "there are records of forced sati too" 1400 Source NICOLO CONTI, IN THE EAST Page 160 and Page no. 6 of Nicolo book After circling the fire, she changes into a white linen garment, and, following the priest's exhortation, jumps into the fire. **If she hesitates, bystanders may throw her in. The ashes are collected and placed in urns, adorning the sepulchres** "If a woman somehow lives the widows were treated very badly, and it's recommended to go sati, as it also provided prestige to the family" Source: India By Al Biruni Editted by Qeyamuddin Ahmad 248 Pages 1000 AD Al Biruni If a wife loses her husband by death, she cannot marry another man. She has only to choose between two things - either to remain a widow as long as she lives or to burn herself; and the latter eventuality is considered the preferable, because as a widow she is ill-treated as long as she lives. As regards the wives of the kings, they are in the habit of burning them, whether they wish it or not, by which they desire to prevent any of them by chance committing something unworthy of the illustrious husband. 1300 AD MARCO POLO Another custom is that when a man has committed a crime and is condemned to die, he expresses a wish to devote himself in honour of a certain divinity, to which the king consents. His relations and friends then place him on a wagon, giving him twelve knives, and lead him through the city, calling out, "This brave man is about to kill himself for the love of the great idol." When they arrive at the place of execution, he takes a knife and cries aloud, "I kill myself for the love of such a deity." He then, with different knives, strikes himself in one arm, then in the other, next in the stomach, and so on until he expires. His relations burn his body with great joy. I must tell you another custom of this country. When a man is dead and his body is burned, his wife throws herself into the fire with her lord. She is then much praised by the people, and many ladies follow her example. Source: Travels and Adventures of Marco Polo Page 50 Travels in Asia and Africa, Ibn Battuta (1325) also mention that the women who burn herself bring prestiges "Also, weather going by force or groomed in a way so they will do it by her choice, it is till a immoral thing to exist" that's my arguments, and valid one. all my record are before mughal too
First mentioned about birth based Jati and Varna are found in rigveda ( first mandala ), rigveda is said to be the first Veda among the four vedas. So birth based jati and varna came way before the word Hindu (the Persian mispronunciation of Sindhu) or word sanatan. So Jati and varna are oldest of all made by Brahmins putting themselves on top of hierarchical structure. Yes, Britishers did take advantage coz that's why they were here for but blame everything on them shows how ignorant this guy is. Jati and Varna is a as old as rigveda...
Bhai counter toh karo questions puchte ho phir jo bolta hai guru ka pravachan jaise sunte rehte ho maine hi 4-5 comment kar dale counter karte hue...... beerbiceps 2 banna chahte ho?
Yaar matlab kya batau bro you just become Beerbiceps part 2when you can Ask a lot of encounter questions apne bas han han kiya puri podcast me kohi bhi taraka encounter question nahi puchhe phir bolte Hain beerbiceps jainse log sabse ganda speudo science wala podcast banata haine kisibhi taraka encounter question nahi puchhta ye same cheez to tumlog bhi kar rahein ho😂😂😂 then what is the difference between you and beerbiceps and then again you're complaining people are spreading superstition and speudo science but you yourself doing the same thing. Ap logo pe kya badlav layengge jab ap khud hi thik nahi haine 😂😂
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....???? then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai.... for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad.... You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)? question.... Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
Show me one good thing. Meine paada hai. If you read the first couple chapters itself automatically you see bigotry and justified hate against jews. Secondly Qur'an is null and void if you don't the hadis. You have to read the hadis to understand the context of the Qur'an. Forget that the Qur'an is not even written in proper order. You need to find the revelation order version of the Qur'an to even have coherence.
I believe that many people here referring to @projectsatyalok & Vimoh's debate are either unaware or intentionally ignoring why Bhargav emphasizes academic definitions over colloquial interpretations. There’s a reason definitions exist in dictionaries: to enable clear, unambiguous discussions. When ambiguity is allowed, it becomes an easy escape for those who want to avoid losing a debate. Precision, in fact, is often emphasized by people who know what they’re talking about. If you watch Vimoh’s video titled 'Dodging the Definition of Feminism', you’ll notice that even he insists his opponent on using the correct, dictionary definition of feminism, rather than how it’s interpreted colloquially. This is the very strategy he uses to further the conversation effectively (conveniently). The problem arises when we selectively reference dictionary definitions for things we support but then lean on colloquial interpretations when we want to avoid the burden of proof or counter-arguments. That’s not questioning for answers , that’s questioning for the sake of 'questioning' someone. Vimoh, as a politically motivated atheist, seems more interested in pushing his political agenda by challenging the existence of God, (something that heavily influences this country’s political stances). However, this approach doesn’t hold much weight. I’m not criticizing his choice to be an atheist, but it’s essential to recognize that atheism still involves a belief- the belief in the non-existence of Go, which is also not based on any knowledge about God so far. Even if he claims he 'lacks belief,' it’s the same argument theists could use, stating they 'lack belief in God's non-existence.' Many theists actually hold this position. By this logic, there’s no reason to expect theists to prove anything to atheists like Vimoh, who just seems more interested in debunking and mocking rather than engaging. When we engage in discussions about God’s existence using reason, logic, and science, we should also be prepared to address counter-arguments in the actual terms rather than escaping when confronted with exact definitions or logic. This avoidance shows a lack of genuine curiosity. Perhaps this is why Vimoh limits his comment section, he’s more focused on spreading his ideas without giving space for real-time counterarguments. Definitions make debates clearer. A theist believes 'God exists,' an atheist believes in the negation, i.e., 'God does not exist,' and an agnostic affirms in neither of the two propositions, as both seem non-convincing enough. This clarity is crucial, because with this as reference, one can easily know where their psychological state lies. If someone claims to 'lack belief in God's existence,' they need to ask themselves whether they believe in its negation or neither. This clarifies their position. And once the position is established, it will eventually allow for richer and more intellectually engaging discussions, something an intellectual audience looks for, (unless the audience consists of the ones who watch it to confirm their biases). Bhargav clearly has a lot of academic knowledge and due to that might be suffering from the 'curse of knowledge,' where he might struggle to simplify complex ideas, and people use that as an escape in the guise of 'too complex for colloquial discussions'. As feedback, he might benefit from framing his arguments in colloquial terms, bridging smartly his academic insights with the language others are so rigid about. Of course it should be the other way round, but at least this way, they can no more hide behind the excuse of "Too difficult to understand".
Shlok k baato pr aap k pass agr koi argument nhi hai iss he liye aap host pr sawal utha rhe because wo he last cheez hai puri baato ko deny krne ka ( grow up kid)
Yeh banda high questions ko cheap example ke sath justify krne ki koshish krr rha Host bhi baki podcaster ki tarah hm ha yah koi counter question hi nhi Aur guest ne to apni hi khichdi paka rakhi hai😅 Agr kusi cheej ko defend na krr pao to use jhootha ya kisi dusre ka narrative prove krdo Bada hi narrow mindset he is guest ka
45:50 i will little disagree with him there was no unjustice to eklavya 1. he was a bhil 2. his father name was hiranyadhanu who was the general under the jarasandha army and later eklavya too served as general under the jarasandha and now i dont need to explain about jarasandha invasions of krishnas kingdom everyone knows that 3. dronacharya was no ordinary tution teacher, he was the rajguru , he was the salaried person by the kauravas and the pandavas , he has to keep his promise to the king and his rule .
Bhai jab tu usse convince nhi h to counter kyu nhi krta h ....tere aur beer biceps m fark kya rha gya...baki teri mrzi tera Channel krle guest ko bhi khush per aise jada din nhi chl pyga
Counter karne ke liye debate or interview nahi hai , it's a podcast, where host is not against his thinking ,in podcast host actually allows his views ,countering in podcast is like being biased towards ideology
@@akshaykesarkar7045 fr bro😂😂they just want to be what they are. And then they say I am rational and intellectual. When I say vimoh's comment section, I have tears in my eyes bcz of laughing 😂😂
53:58 major reason is also the myth of blood getting impure if we leave beyond the sea it was not in buddhism so buddhism got spread most islamic countries where buddhist in past In South of india many people converted to islam so as to go to trade beyond countries to earn money as in hinduism crossing sea was prohibited
@@MohommadAnsari-i9k why u got violent Muhammed bhai 😭 And hindusim is mixture of many gotra traditions In south theyyam in Kerala and tamil nadu theyyam means bota kola which u saw in kantara In that pooja for diety alchohal and meat is kept as offerings for diety historically beef was also given So can u do the same in North? Na right Bro many sect of hindus beleved sea crossing is impure mainly in northern region and it also came to some South at a particular time Many people of ezhava community converted to islam to overcome this poor life Most converting happened like this than with sword of tipu sulthan Or mughals
@@anonymouspersonbehind5354 modern Hinduism is a part of ancient Vedic religion also called the real Sanatan dharma And now Hinduism is mixture of sects like vaishanavism, shaivism, shaktism, etc...
At around 50 min he is saying ki casteism nhi tha , then why Buddhism and Jainism came into existence around 500 Bc, gupta period started around 300 AD, Not 300 bc. You could have countered and asked him at that point
The teachings of the Buddha have been described as fundamentally anti-caste. However, there is also evidence of complacency towards caste discrimination in early Buddhist literature, and it is unclear whether members of "untouchable" castes were treated as having the same potential for enlightenment as others.@@prasmitkumarpradhan1497
Bhai ek genuine feedback du to bhargav apni baat samjha nhi pata h aur kya pata m samjh nahi pata hu...but chance kam h .. Kyunki host ka khud ka facial appearance aise h ki use chamka nhi h kuch.. literally pure podcast m weird sa face....😂
Haan exactly. . . Bhai ko baat samzhi thi but hazam nahi ho rahi thi. But counter question puchta toh next tym guest nahi aata isiliye Maan mein hi bechain ho raha tha.
So is it related to only specific religion or all religions, becuz so many people get inspired by dharmic and greek philosophy so it means it affects positively right? But u don't want to listen the thing that how some peaceful religion adopted aggressive practices which is not present in the religion itself but some of the religions are actually founders of that practices like jihad concept and neglecting others based on their beliefs etc etc, so basically u r trying to convince all religions are equal and h*rmful?right ? Actually that's not entirely true🤡
@@bullishboi I wonder why people take the effort to appear inquisitive when they are not, you are convinced that x religion is bad and ur brand of religion is all good, great for you. I view religion as how it’s practiced - people blindly following outdated rituals & superstitions, dumping deities in rivers not caring if it pollutes water sources, indoctrination of young kids, discriminating against fellow citizens based on sects, food habits etc as well as forcing religion into disciplines it has no rightful place like politics, law, public institutions. This does more harm than good
@@samarthpandey683 First of all, every civilization began with nature worship. I view religion through a different lens-many of the rituals may seem outdated, but that doesn't mean they lack meaning. Societal structures form the foundation of a great civilization. *Even today, many young people are confused about their identity. Concepts like men getting pregnant, promoting n*de culture for children, and propagating illogical philosophies reflect this confusion. Of course, not everything in the past was perfect, but some modern ideologies are far more harmful, especially those that promote violence against other faiths, slavery, and extreme patriarchy.* *These are far more damaging than truly philosophical religions.* Moreover, you haven't studied how civilizations began with rivers and the worship of rivers. Dont think that it is not considered now because people are getting modern ,,nope many indigenous peoples Were wiped out by other ideologies , Now, you're complaining about people immersing deities in rivers, even though those civilizations contributed significantly to GDP. In contrast, modern activities like factories pollute rivers far more than any religious practices. *Your argument lacks logic; you're ignoring the bigger challenges like patriarchy in roots of their religion, kufr terrorism by simplifying everything with statements like "all are equal," by only considering things like superstitions which was started in western countries In the shade of prophetism which, frankly, makes no sense in this context.* And yeah you are following many things from hich related to ancient values ,and btw you are so much wrong about caste system you have mentioned in this comment, so basically read about this , and apply your first line on you 😃 You re under formal fallacy ,and yeah you don't know anything about philosophical perspective and how civilizations evolve even through so many invasion and colonialism which played the crucial on changing the culture
@@bullishboi ur rebuttal makes a hilarious read, that word salad you created only proves my point and also ur own insecurities wrt our history, heritage and current state of affairs. For eg, I mentioned religion creates division of people into sects, food habits which is seen in most if not all religion (there are sects in Islam, Christianity ) and it is YOU who is ranting about casteism practised in our culture. In economics there is a concept of negative externalities which completely wipes out ur poor argument to defend water pollution caused by submerging of idols. And yes everything we see now is a result of cross cultural interactions, accerelated in medieval period when other cultures were able to wield far greater influence. Only thing I have argued is that would be best to reform what we have now rather than just take pride in what it was thousands of years bak. Seems u have an itch to use ur templated response to anyone who disagrees with you, maybe edit it next time and leave out irrelevant bits that exposes ur inability to comprehend the centre point of the arugment.
@samarthpandey683, honestly, it seems like you might need some mental health therapy . The entire conversation started with that all religions are equal, yet your comment specifically focused on Hinduism. Now, you're backtracking by claiming, 'I'm not only talking about Hinduism.' saar😂 At least educate yourself about the history and culture before making flawed arguments. 🤡 I’m not sure why, whenever someone discusses Hinduism or the logic behind religious philosophy, certain people immediately bring up "rabdirona" (irrelevant topics) like superstition and cults-things that aren’t even explicitly central to Hinduism and even present in this modern era Please stay on topic 🤦"king of tangents"
Hinduism is not a religion, infact it is brahmanism which is nothing but caste system and there is no point in asking why Hinduism didn't spread like Buddhism and islam. Religion can be spread not caste system. Janehudari Brahmins didn't know anything about religion until Muslim came to india. Foreigners in America and Russia have embraced brahmanism because they have no idea about caste system, if they know about it then they would never embrace brahmanism.
@@Krishsagar852 was there anything like hinduism in the past ? any person in the past has ever introduced as hindu??? people had no such identity as hindu .... people were known as brahmin , shudra etc..... or shaiva , vaishanav....etc
@@electrondynamics9721 Varna is a social identity not a religious one, Hinduism at that time wasn't reconciled so people would be called advaitan,shiva bhakt,vishnu bhakt etc depending on their beliefs. A brahmin and shudra both could be shiva bhakt because belief is a personal identity not a social one.
It is great that you platform guests with varying views. But, Bhargav bhai was here to whitewash pakhand. To say that Manusmriti also has "good" bits is like saying, Adolf bhaiyya did some bad thungs but was a good painter. 😂 The entire concept of karma, punar janma and atma, is the root cause of all evil in our society and it is validated by the Shrutis i.e. vedas and Upanishads and smritis alike. Your past life karma, decide your guna, your guna decide your jaati in this life. Even the supreme Vedantin that is our PURI PEETH SHANKARACHARYA supports this with various references from upanishadas, geeta and smritis in his RUclips videos How does a person who has spent his entire life reading and understanding shastras like the Shankaracharyaji come to different conclusions than Bhargav bhaiiya? Amd if you van interpret the shastras in multiple ways, which is yhe correct interpretation? And why hasn't lord come down to earth is some or the other Avatar when it is clear than wrong interpretations are being used for 1000s of years? 😢 This whitewashing project, where you concede some points but then cleverly brush them under the carpet as "not important" is very evil. What proof does he have when he says that Manusmriti was not used all over India? And what proof does he have that additions have been made to Manusmriti? Visuddha Manusmriti by Arya Samaj, where these arguments are made, has been debunked by various Hindu peethas themselves. And if theists can claim "lack of belief that no god exists", but a theist by ACAMDEMIC definition is one who believes that atleast one god exists. How do you reconcile these two statements
@@madhusudanmunda3055 kaha likha hai ki budhh bhagwan hai? Ya phir buddh ko follow nahi karoge to agle janm "paap" yoni prapt hogi Aisa likha hai kya kahi? Khud ka dimag chalao
@@yourguyin2554 बौद्ध ग्रंथ में लिखा है बुद्ध भगवान है पत्थर में लिखा हुआ मिला वो भगवान है । भगवान बुद्ध महिलाओं को छोटा मानते है दलितों जाति को लेकर वो गलत कहते थे 🤣
I request you to call a normal people like us as well. I know this thing can't give you so much views but we can get to know what normal people are thinking just the way those youtubers are expressing themselves.
He's saying manusmriti mai sirf buri chize pakad ke uski acchi chize ko ignore kar rahe its applicable when wo kharab chize bohot kharab na ho it's ok if someone has a habit of laying but it's not ok if that guy is harming people jhut bolke kal ye bolega dawood ne 10 12 khun kiye hai par uski wajah se 100 logo ka pet bhi toh bhar Raha🤡
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....???? then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai.... for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad.... You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)? question.... Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
@@prasmitkumarpradhan1497yes "academia" stuff. Denying that caste system existed when there are literal genetic studies to show that endogamy (marrying within a group/tribe/caste) has been a thing for atleast 2 millennia. On top of that, we also have memetic evidence in the form of multiple casteist verses in bhagvad geeta, or casteist rules in manu and other smritis. What ,ore do you need? If that is not enough, ask government to release stunted growth, malnourishment caste wise data. You will find the systemic oppresion that SCs STs and OBCs have faced in the name of Hindu god/s
@@yourguyin2554 he never denied lol are you ambedkarite? And talking about academia the genetic shows that the intermixing happened with all no pure race exist which concluded that in early vedic period caste dynamic was fluid
@@yourguyin2554oh really Nice Joke kiddo literally cast system came with Britisher's to Divide India Just like they did In Africa with Hutis ans Tutsis . And don't follow False translation by Missionaries and Others .If you want to read follow real Books and till 1884 there was no caste but Varna .Do home works and then speak about others 😂
Vimoh I think yeh bol rha tha ki real society mein log academic definition use nhi karte. So Bhargava shud articulate things in practical ways. Tum har insaan ko weight ka unit bolte toh nahi ghumonge na 😅😅😅
34:45 is it coz of any context that happened due to that period Coz even in hadiths of quran there are verses where muhamed bhai respects other religions or other gotras of that place but what was becoz of the time before mecca war when muhamed bhai had nothing he had to be diplomatic to gain trust and power like modi collabing with bihar and naidu sab But after mecca war it was all genocide of people and elimination of gotra religions which existed their for thousands of years
bhai librandu left logon ko bola jata he social media pe shayad... ye bhai toh poora hamara hi right wing banda he re|igious guy, toh kuch sense nhi bana raha apka comment!
Hindu apologist. He isnt even good at it, if you want proper apologist look into right wing media, you will way better defences of hinduism and how the caste didnt originate from it.
@@TheSumitKataria all the Hindu apologists have been shafted by the Puri Shankaracharya RUclips channel 😭😭. Are they going to claim now that they know more shatras than him? Their new jumla is saying that English/Portuguese started the caste system (as caste is an English word). This is same as saying before Newton there was no gravity. 😂
@@kshatriyafied there is no such thing as agnostic "hindu". To be hindu of any kind you have to defend the karma-punar janm-guna-dharma concept. Which makes you an apologist.
@@yourguyin2554 he has an affinity towards hindusim and hindu culture since he belongs to that. He is agnostic. Veer savarkar was also an atheist but gave his hindutva philosophy.
Host is knowledgeless. Bharag is not accurately current on text, history, and scientific position also. He criticize vimoh on academic theory and he himself and answering on this example vimoh not take position on atheism and he take taking position on ramayan, Mahabharat , manusmiti etc ...
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....???? then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai.... for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad.... You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)? question.... Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
Nonsense ....You are talking about ..... Shankracharya uesd to say that "Caste is necessary" ..... Manusmriti is the most unnecessary book on the earth.....
@@AGRIUNNYAN when Sankaracharya said about this and What Manusmriti Says about caste haa what it says .There was no Caste but Varna .we People of West Bengal and Orissa Still follow Varna not Caste because British Constructed Caste never affected us unlike Other states .Same Britishers did with Tutsis and Hutis ans Rawanda Genocide Happened same with Srilanka Civil war . Manusmriti is 1000 times better than Bible and Quran or other religions books !
@@AyushBose-gk2xg Manusmriti better'for you but that book exploits our people or Shankracharya......... Casteism is one of the most toxic things for society ...The person who is never able understand that never faced....Come Gwalior at village of Raipur, ghantigo, dabra, bhitarbar ....I will show you but sarvan idiots doing with his neighbours...... 🙏🙏
Read manusmriti of arya samaj
@@bharatchim9348 both completed ......Arya samaj mai jatibad hai
@@AGRIUNNYANnahi hai bhai
bhai in logon ko kyun laate ho? theist logon se preach kara rahe ho... atheist ho ya koi spy 😂
Super...💯
1:01:06 jb ghtiya bato ki bat aaye to, ye to har dhrm me hota hai, or kuchh achhi bate mil jaye to, ye achhi bate bhi to hai hmare dhrm me, Bhai achhi bate to hadis me bhi hai, is se kya islam ki hadis ki wo ghtiya bato ko justify kr skte hai, same in Hinduism
Thank you so much for sharing... ⭕♾️
Well this is what you get on podcasts! lots of logical sounding questions but hardly any counter question on answers given.
He is just another J Sai dipak in making (with better looks).
After listening to the conversation between Bhargava and Vimoh, it seems to me that the former has quite a bit of thinking yet to do, when it comes to engaging with another's belief systems.
Philosophy is not the same ballpark as mathematics or physics, since it deals with the subjective experience, rather than objective reality. You can measure the hypotenuse of a right triangle, and conclude it's relationship with it's sides, and that relationship holds true every time, but you cannot so simply measure what's going on in somebody's mind, and what they mean when they use certain words. For that you need to communicate. Sorry, but philosophers do not have the authority to define what atheism is, and impose it as an absolute to be taught to everyone. Language is a far bigger beast than can be caged in the confines of any academic circle. Language is not absolute; it needs no authority, only a common understanding. One may use "weight" and "mass" differently when dealing with physical formulae, but for the average person, they are functionally the same, i.e the amount of substance in a body. Whether or not gravity is acting on it, is inconsequential when we are all affected primarily by the same source of gravity. It seems to me that Bhargava was simply playing semantic games on that front, and I don't see any utility in that. Words do not have absolute meaning. We give them meaning, which transform with place and time, and the many faces that speak their mind. If you are a serious philosopher, then you must consider this while communicating, because your field deals with understanding ideas and beliefs, not imposing them.
Also, you cannot alleviate the burden of proof by framing theism as "lacking belief that god does not exist", because the statement does not necessarily describe a theistic position. It is the negation of gnostic atheism, aka, a positive belief that god does not exist. Both agnostic atheists as well as theists can make such a stament. Fact remains, that the concept of a "god" must be proposed to even begin believing, or not believing. "I lack a belief that XYZ does not exist." Okay, sure, but "What is XYZ? How do you know about it, and what makes you not believe that it doesn't exist? What difference does it make to how you live?" are the important questions here, to which there may be a spectrum of answers. And I think we lose out on that spectrum, if we box ourselves into fixed academic definitions, or rigid structures of logic.
For instance, a coin may land on heads or tails in an expected situation, but if Schrodinger's Samurai shows up out of nowhere and chops it in half, one may find that one half lands on heads nd the other on tails. In this case, our variables are limited, and we haven't considered the samurai. In Bhargava's example with the silver ring, of god being defined as being both the material and the manufacturer, he is engaging in an imaginary exercise. There can be countless other imaginary exercises such as that, like the concept of cyclical time, rather than linear time, which can turn the chain of contingencies into a loop of events, thereby solving infinite regress. We can concieve of dimensions beyond our perception, where infinite regress does not apply. We may not be able to fathom it, but we can propose it. God is but one such proposal, and by simply defining it, it does not become true. We have a frame of reference for silver rings, and coins, and samurais, but not for what lies beyond the veil of observation. As such we can only speculate, and it's important to communicate our speculations, and figure out what exactly whe believe, and why, because it affects our lives, as well as the lives of those around us. And we cannot do that by conflating philosophy to the same standards of objectivity as physics, because frankly, everyone has their own individualistic philosophy, which serves them for better or worse. One needn't have studied the mental masturbators and orgasmic orators of ages past to have sound reasoning, and those that have done so, may not have reasoning that is quite as sound. Studying philosophy may give you perspective, but not necessarily hard facts, like scientific subjects do.
@@metalman4393 agreed. Watching that debate/discussion was really hard. Bhargav claims he is a "local atheist" when asked to defend the idea of hindu gods, at the same time he was defending ideas from Shrutis and Smritis.
He was trying to Trojan horse Vedanta philosophy as Panpsychism. Also, played the game of semantics when it suited him. Absolutely a deceiver. After watching this podcast I know he is not a good faith actor
@@yourguyin2554 please give the link of that video i can't find it...
@@electrondynamics9721 It's vimohs atheist hour #264 : Caste, privilege and brainwashing, starting at 53 minutes. Some channels auto-delete links, so sharing title instead.
Don't bring this guy again on this channel ...😂😂
Dimag hai ??? Konse class tak padhe ho??? 10th??
@@Risho7-m7e I have brain that's why i am non believer not like theists first go to school not to temples 😂😂
@@sudeepheni6016 Newton, Galileo, Descartes, Einstein, Nikola Tesla these are some biggest scientific minds in the history of human kind who beloved in God . Do you think you have better view of world and it's function than them. You are just nobody 😂. Do you know that Newton and Einstein are considered to be the most revolutionary scientist of all time.
@@Risho7-m7eTesla and Einstein both were agnostic they rejected all the Religious God!!
@@okay.90 they rejected dogmatic form of religion. But they didn't rejected the necessary being or creator . They believed in God .
Budhha's teaching had nothing to do with caste....people weren't divided even on the basis of their occupation....
buddhhhiiiiizzzzzaaaam mein bhi caaaassstteee hai saaarrrrrr......
Vinayapitaka IV 6 enumerates jatis. In fact same scripture calling an ordinary monk as having come from hina jaati is tantamounts to abusing him and calling him names
There are criterias for testing dignities of monk on basis of jaati. Paccittya II.
Yes it has caste sarrr , bas reservation ke liye sikho mat sarr😂
Someone please name or link the video where the debate between Bhargava and Vimoh happened
Sati existed before the Mughal too on large scale, and there are records of forced sati too. If a woman somehow lives the widows were treated very badly, and it's recommanded to go sati, as it also provided prestige to the family. Also, weather going by force or groomed in a way so they will do it by her choice, it is till a immoral thing to exist.
stop lying
Can you provide some sources for your claim?
@@revisehigh Yes, "before the mughal"
so, i will provide all the records before the Mughal or contemporary.
"there are records of forced sati too"
1400
Source NICOLO CONTI, IN THE EAST Page 160 and Page no. 6 of Nicolo book
After circling the fire, she changes into a white linen garment, and, following the priest's exhortation, jumps into the fire. **If she hesitates, bystanders may throw her in. The ashes are collected and placed in urns, adorning the sepulchres**
"If a woman somehow lives the widows were treated very badly, and it's recommended to go sati, as it also provided prestige to the family"
Source: India By Al Biruni Editted by Qeyamuddin Ahmad 248 Pages
1000 AD
Al Biruni
If a wife loses her husband by death, she cannot marry another man. She has only to choose between two things - either to remain a widow as long as she lives or to burn herself; and the latter eventuality is considered the preferable, because as a widow she is ill-treated as long as she lives. As regards the wives of the kings, they are in the habit of burning them, whether they wish it or not, by which they desire to prevent any of them by chance committing something unworthy of the illustrious husband.
1300 AD
MARCO POLO
Another custom is that when a man has committed a crime and is condemned to die, he expresses a wish to devote himself in honour of a certain divinity, to which the king consents. His relations and friends then place him on a wagon, giving him twelve knives, and lead him through the city, calling out, "This brave man is about to kill himself for the love of the great idol." When they arrive at the place of execution, he takes a knife and cries aloud, "I kill myself for the love of such a deity." He then, with different knives, strikes himself in one arm, then in the other, next in the stomach, and so on until he expires. His relations burn his body with great joy.
I must tell you another custom of this country. When a man is dead and his body is burned, his wife throws herself into the fire with her lord. She is then much praised by the people, and many ladies follow her example.
Source: Travels and Adventures of Marco Polo Page 50
Travels in Asia and Africa, Ibn Battuta (1325)
also mention that the women who burn herself bring prestiges
"Also, weather going by force or groomed in a way so they will do it by her choice, it is till a immoral thing to exist"
that's my arguments, and valid one.
all my record are before mughal too
Bakwaas
Elaborate
First mentioned about birth based Jati and Varna are found in rigveda ( first mandala ), rigveda is said to be the first Veda among the four vedas. So birth based jati and varna came way before the word Hindu (the Persian mispronunciation of Sindhu) or word sanatan. So Jati and varna are oldest of all made by Brahmins putting themselves on top of hierarchical structure. Yes, Britishers did take advantage coz that's why they were here for but blame everything on them shows how ignorant this guy is. Jati and Varna is a as old as rigveda...
Reference?
Rig veda
@@electrondynamics9721 verse?
@@Krishsagar852 mujhe kya pata ....
@@electrondynamics9721 Obviously you wouldn't know because it doesn't exist, hereditary varna discrimination doesn't exist in veda or upanishads.
Bhayi SJ se debate kyo ni krte😂😂😂
Sj 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
He is a pseudo scientist.
Scientist nhi naali ka keeda hai😂, science ki bezzato mat karo bhai@@Krishsagar852
Bhai counter toh karo questions puchte ho phir jo bolta hai guru ka pravachan jaise sunte rehte ho maine hi 4-5 comment kar dale counter karte hue......
beerbiceps 2 banna chahte ho?
Best podcast. Aise hi logo ko bulaya karo 🎉
Quran mein kaafi misogyny hai
Bro, like are you going to counter ANYTHING? Like, he gave so many opportunities...what a waste of time
Yaar matlab kya batau bro you just become Beerbiceps part 2when you can Ask a lot of encounter questions apne bas han han kiya puri podcast me kohi bhi taraka encounter question nahi puchhe phir bolte Hain beerbiceps jainse log sabse ganda speudo science wala podcast banata haine kisibhi taraka encounter question nahi puchhta ye same cheez to tumlog bhi kar rahein ho😂😂😂 then what is the difference between you and beerbiceps and then again you're complaining people are spreading superstition and speudo science but you yourself doing the same thing. Ap logo pe kya badlav layengge jab ap khud hi thik nahi haine 😂😂
Quran mai bhi bahut see achi baate hai. If i will throw a bowl of rice at the wall, some rice will stick.
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....????
then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai....
for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad....
You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)?
question....
Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
Reason revolution member spotted
Show me one good thing. Meine paada hai. If you read the first couple chapters itself automatically you see bigotry and justified hate against jews.
Secondly Qur'an is null and void if you don't the hadis. You have to read the hadis to understand the context of the Qur'an.
Forget that the Qur'an is not even written in proper order. You need to find the revelation order version of the Qur'an to even have coherence.
Bhai Vese views/comments ke liye poora use kar raha hai Vimoh bhai Ka 👏👏👏
Bhai tujhe contact krna h music se related kaha kru?
I believe that many people here referring to @projectsatyalok
& Vimoh's debate are either unaware or intentionally ignoring why Bhargav emphasizes academic definitions over colloquial interpretations. There’s a reason definitions exist in dictionaries: to enable clear, unambiguous discussions. When ambiguity is allowed, it becomes an easy escape for those who want to avoid losing a debate. Precision, in fact, is often emphasized by people who know what they’re talking about. If you watch Vimoh’s video titled 'Dodging the Definition of Feminism', you’ll notice that even he insists his opponent on using the correct, dictionary definition of feminism, rather than how it’s interpreted colloquially. This is the very strategy he uses to further the conversation effectively (conveniently).
The problem arises when we selectively reference dictionary definitions for things we support but then lean on colloquial interpretations when we want to avoid the burden of proof or counter-arguments. That’s not questioning for answers , that’s questioning for the sake of 'questioning' someone. Vimoh, as a politically motivated atheist, seems more interested in pushing his political agenda by challenging the existence of God, (something that heavily influences this country’s political stances). However, this approach doesn’t hold much weight. I’m not criticizing his choice to be an atheist, but it’s essential to recognize that atheism still involves a belief- the belief in the non-existence of Go, which is also not based on any knowledge about God so far.
Even if he claims he 'lacks belief,' it’s the same argument theists could use, stating they 'lack belief in God's non-existence.' Many theists actually hold this position. By this logic, there’s no reason to expect theists to prove anything to atheists like Vimoh, who just seems more interested in debunking and mocking rather than engaging.
When we engage in discussions about God’s existence using reason, logic, and science, we should also be prepared to address counter-arguments in the actual terms rather than escaping when confronted with exact definitions or logic. This avoidance shows a lack of genuine curiosity. Perhaps this is why Vimoh limits his comment section, he’s more focused on spreading his ideas without giving space for real-time counterarguments.
Definitions make debates clearer. A theist believes 'God exists,' an atheist believes in the negation, i.e., 'God does not exist,' and an agnostic affirms in neither of the two propositions, as both seem non-convincing enough. This clarity is crucial, because with this as reference, one can easily know where their psychological state lies. If someone claims to 'lack belief in God's existence,' they need to ask themselves whether they believe in its negation or neither. This clarifies their position. And once the position is established, it will eventually allow for richer and more intellectually engaging discussions, something an intellectual audience looks for, (unless the audience consists of the ones who watch it to confirm their biases).
Bhargav clearly has a lot of academic knowledge and due to that might be suffering from the 'curse of knowledge,' where he might struggle to simplify complex ideas, and people use that as an escape in the guise of 'too complex for colloquial discussions'. As feedback, he might benefit from framing his arguments in colloquial terms, bridging smartly his academic insights with the language others are so rigid about. Of course it should be the other way round, but at least this way, they can no more hide behind the excuse of "Too difficult to understand".
Host is trying to justify Hinduism in everything
Shlok k baato pr aap k pass agr koi argument nhi hai iss he liye aap host pr sawal utha rhe because wo he last cheez hai puri baato ko deny krne ka ( grow up kid)
U don't know anything about hinduism but u want to reject others by just saying he is justifying hinduism 😂 what a rubbish answer
Waste
Aapki videos dekhne ke baad me Existential Crisis ke Samundar me dhubte jaa raha hu....... 🌊🫠🫢
Thank you for this video... ❤💕
Great... ❤️
Where can I find this Bhargava and Vimoh discussion? Is it members only?
Definitely not for members only. But u will have to search for it. it was one of those his live where this person entered for discussion.
@@Bjljspjmbah Found it, thanks! It was one of the top results. Not in title, but Bhargav was mentioned in comments, so I guess youtube tracked it
@@Bjljspjmbahwhat to search ? I can't find the video
Yeh banda high questions ko cheap example ke sath justify krne ki koshish krr rha
Host bhi baki podcaster ki tarah hm ha yah koi counter question hi nhi
Aur guest ne to apni hi khichdi paka rakhi hai😅
Agr kusi cheej ko defend na krr pao to use jhootha ya kisi dusre ka narrative prove krdo
Bada hi narrow mindset he is guest ka
Question achhe the, This video forced me to think more rationally.😊😊😊
O bhai es bande ko counter toh kar yarr kisi ek baat par toh kya fayeda phir podcast karne ka
Absolutely Brilliant and Beautiful. ❤️💫
45:50
i will little disagree with him
there was no unjustice to eklavya
1. he was a bhil
2. his father name was hiranyadhanu who was the general under the jarasandha army and later eklavya too served as general under the jarasandha and now i dont need to explain about jarasandha invasions of krishnas kingdom everyone knows that
3. dronacharya was no ordinary tution teacher, he was the rajguru , he was the salaried person by the kauravas and the pandavas , he has to keep his promise to the king and his rule .
Bhai jab tu usse convince nhi h to counter kyu nhi krta h ....tere aur beer biceps m fark kya rha gya...baki teri mrzi tera Channel krle guest ko bhi khush per aise jada din nhi chl pyga
Counter karne ke liye debate or interview nahi hai , it's a podcast, where host is not against his thinking ,in podcast host actually allows his views ,countering in podcast is like being biased towards ideology
Discussion to acha tha par bhargava bhai mic bahut kharab tha. Plz improve mic quality of your guests also
People crying in comments esko mat la, kyu kya huva jab koi rational baat bolne laga to aap logo ki faatne kyu lagi.
They actually are getting scared that someone came with logical thinking rather than popat thinking 😂
@@akshaykesarkar7045 fr bro😂😂they just want to be what they are. And then they say I am rational and intellectual. When I say vimoh's comment section, I have tears in my eyes bcz of laughing 😂😂
Waste, issey pata hi nahin kaise cross questions karna ??
Bhargav go to Science Journey.. then we see the fun..
Science Journey ko bolo Sanatan Samiksha aane , woh wahan se kabse bhag gaya hai
@@rishirajsharma7207sj sir केवल ऊची जात वालो से डिबेट करते है न कि दलित लोगो से
Science journey 😂😂😂 what a joke 😂 bruh science journey dont even know how to debate 😂
53:58 major reason is also the myth of blood getting impure if we leave beyond the sea it was not in buddhism so buddhism got spread most islamic countries where buddhist in past
In South of india many people converted to islam so as to go to trade beyond countries to earn money as in hinduism crossing sea was prohibited
Any evidence?
So u were saying cholas didn't crossed the seas and conquerd south asian countries? 😂😂😂
@@MohommadAnsari-i9k why u got violent Muhammed bhai 😭
And hindusim is mixture of many gotra traditions
In south theyyam in Kerala and tamil nadu theyyam means bota kola which u saw in kantara
In that pooja for diety alchohal and meat is kept as offerings for diety historically beef was also given
So can u do the same in North? Na right
Bro many sect of hindus beleved sea crossing is impure mainly in northern region and it also came to some South at a particular time
Many people of ezhava community converted to islam to overcome this poor life
Most converting happened like this than with sword of tipu sulthan Or mughals
@@anonymouspersonbehind5354 ur south indian land has been fully conquerd by missionaries which has been feeding up lies just like this 😂😂😂
@@anonymouspersonbehind5354 modern Hinduism is a part of ancient Vedic religion also called the real Sanatan dharma
And now Hinduism is mixture of sects like vaishanavism, shaivism, shaktism, etc...
Ye bakwas sunane laye isko? Waste of time.
Har dusri Baat pe ye bolta hai ye sirf hamare nahi baki sab religion/culture me dikhai deta h to fir tere religion me kya Khaas h😢😢
At around 50 min he is saying ki casteism nhi tha , then why Buddhism and Jainism came into existence around 500 Bc, gupta period started around 300 AD, Not 300 bc. You could have countered and asked him at that point
Buddhism and jainism has ridgid casteism.
Read books bruh Buddhism and Jainism also have caste
There is no evidence of caste based discrimination before 15th century ad😂
@@prasmitkumarpradhan1497 that too rigid and birth based discrimination
The teachings of the Buddha have been described as fundamentally anti-caste. However, there is also evidence of complacency towards caste discrimination in early Buddhist literature, and it is unclear whether members of "untouchable" castes were treated as having the same potential for enlightenment as others.@@prasmitkumarpradhan1497
Kis kis ko bula lete ho yaar..kuch samjh nahi aa rha..khud he bol rha khud he samajh rha..agla gya bhad me
Mera religion sabse best by arpit explain
Ignorance, no argument against his points. Meaningless comment.
Thanks...
Bhai ek genuine feedback du to bhargav apni baat samjha nhi pata h aur kya pata m samjh nahi pata hu...but chance kam h ..
Kyunki host ka khud ka facial appearance aise h ki use chamka nhi h kuch.. literally pure podcast m weird sa face....😂
Haan exactly. . . Bhai ko baat samzhi thi but hazam nahi ho rahi thi. But counter question puchta toh next tym guest nahi aata isiliye Maan mein hi bechain ho raha tha.
❤@@simple_guy333
This chat focuses on what religion was thousands of years ago, shouldnt we focus on what it is now and how its affect the society?
So is it related to only specific religion or all religions, becuz so many people get inspired by dharmic and greek philosophy so it means it affects positively right? But u don't want to listen the thing that how some peaceful religion adopted aggressive practices which is not present in the religion itself but some of the religions are actually founders of that practices like jihad concept and neglecting others based on their beliefs etc etc, so basically u r trying to convince all religions are equal and h*rmful?right ? Actually that's not entirely true🤡
@@bullishboi I wonder why people take the effort to appear inquisitive when they are not, you are convinced that x religion is bad and ur brand of religion is all good, great for you. I view religion as how it’s practiced - people blindly following outdated rituals & superstitions, dumping deities in rivers not caring if it pollutes water sources, indoctrination of young kids, discriminating against fellow citizens based on sects, food habits etc as well as forcing religion into disciplines it has no rightful place like politics, law, public institutions. This does more harm than good
@@samarthpandey683 First of all, every civilization began with nature worship. I view religion through a different lens-many of the rituals may seem outdated, but that doesn't mean they lack meaning. Societal structures form the foundation of a great civilization. *Even today, many young people are confused about their identity. Concepts like men getting pregnant, promoting n*de culture for children, and propagating illogical philosophies reflect this confusion. Of course, not everything in the past was perfect, but some modern ideologies are far more harmful, especially those that promote violence against other faiths, slavery, and extreme patriarchy.*
*These are far more damaging than truly philosophical religions.*
Moreover, you haven't studied how civilizations began with rivers and the worship of rivers. Dont think that it is not considered now because people are getting modern ,,nope many indigenous peoples Were wiped out by other ideologies , Now, you're complaining about people immersing deities in rivers, even though those civilizations contributed significantly to GDP. In contrast, modern activities like factories pollute rivers far more than any religious practices. *Your argument lacks logic; you're ignoring the bigger challenges like patriarchy in roots of their religion, kufr terrorism by simplifying everything with statements like "all are equal," by only considering things like superstitions which was started in western countries In the shade of prophetism which, frankly, makes no sense in this context.*
And yeah you are following many things from hich related to ancient values ,and btw you are so much wrong about caste system you have mentioned in this comment, so basically read about this , and apply your first line on you 😃
You re under formal fallacy ,and yeah you don't know anything about philosophical perspective and how civilizations evolve even through so many invasion and colonialism which played the crucial on changing the culture
@@bullishboi ur rebuttal makes a hilarious read, that word salad you created only proves my point and also ur own insecurities wrt our history, heritage and current state of affairs. For eg, I mentioned religion creates division of people into sects, food habits which is seen in most if not all religion (there are sects in Islam, Christianity ) and it is YOU who is ranting about casteism practised in our culture. In economics there is a concept of negative externalities which completely wipes out ur poor argument to defend water pollution caused by submerging of idols. And yes everything we see now is a result of cross cultural interactions, accerelated in medieval period when other cultures were able to wield far greater influence. Only thing I have argued is that would be best to reform what we have now rather than just take pride in what it was thousands of years bak. Seems u have an itch to use ur templated response to anyone who disagrees with you, maybe edit it next time and leave out irrelevant bits that exposes ur inability to comprehend the centre point of the arugment.
@samarthpandey683, honestly, it seems like you might need some mental health therapy . The entire conversation started with that all religions are equal, yet your comment specifically focused on Hinduism. Now, you're backtracking by claiming, 'I'm not only talking about Hinduism.' saar😂
At least educate yourself about the history and culture before making flawed arguments. 🤡
I’m not sure why, whenever someone discusses Hinduism or the logic behind religious philosophy, certain people immediately bring up "rabdirona" (irrelevant topics) like superstition and cults-things that aren’t even explicitly central to Hinduism and even present in this modern era
Please stay on topic 🤦"king of tangents"
Bhargav ur thoughts on philosopher dr graham oppy
Graham Oppy is a genius.
@@bhargavmangeshjoshi755 yeah most convincing atheist philosopher and best papers
ढोल गंवार शूद्र पशु नारी।
सकल ताडना के अधिकारी।।
---Meritorious Tulsidas
😂
Kabhi "shlesh alankaar" padha hai?
And this has been said by samudra devta to the ram , its not aid by ram actually people like u don't know anything
Informative video...
Hinduism is not a religion, infact it is brahmanism which is nothing but caste system and there is no point in asking why Hinduism didn't spread like Buddhism and islam.
Religion can be spread not caste system.
Janehudari Brahmins didn't know anything about religion until Muslim came to india.
Foreigners in America and Russia have embraced brahmanism because they have no idea about caste system, if they know about it then they would never embrace brahmanism.
Sounds like a cope, please provide arguement for your claims. 😹
Cope boldunga argument Khatam🤡
@@electrondynamics9721 There was no argument in the comment only allegations. Learn the difference + we can always debate on caste system in Hinduism.
@@Krishsagar852 was there anything like hinduism in the past ? any person in the past has ever introduced as hindu??? people had no such identity as hindu .... people were known as brahmin , shudra etc..... or shaiva , vaishanav....etc
@@electrondynamics9721 Varna is a social identity not a religious one, Hinduism at that time wasn't reconciled so people would be called advaitan,shiva bhakt,vishnu bhakt etc depending on their beliefs. A brahmin and shudra both could be shiva bhakt because belief is a personal identity not a social one.
It is great that you platform guests with varying views. But, Bhargav bhai was here to whitewash pakhand. To say that Manusmriti also has "good" bits is like saying, Adolf bhaiyya did some bad thungs but was a good painter. 😂
The entire concept of karma, punar janma and atma, is the root cause of all evil in our society and it is validated by the Shrutis i.e. vedas and Upanishads and smritis alike.
Your past life karma, decide your guna, your guna decide your jaati in this life. Even the supreme Vedantin that is our PURI PEETH SHANKARACHARYA supports this with various references from upanishadas, geeta and smritis in his RUclips videos
How does a person who has spent his entire life reading and understanding shastras like the Shankaracharyaji come to different conclusions than Bhargav bhaiiya?
Amd if you van interpret the shastras in multiple ways, which is yhe correct interpretation? And why hasn't lord come down to earth is some or the other Avatar when it is clear than wrong interpretations are being used for 1000s of years? 😢
This whitewashing project, where you concede some points but then cleverly brush them under the carpet as "not important" is very evil.
What proof does he have when he says that Manusmriti was not used all over India? And what proof does he have that additions have been made to Manusmriti? Visuddha Manusmriti by Arya Samaj, where these arguments are made, has been debunked by various Hindu peethas themselves.
And if theists can claim "lack of belief that no god exists", but a theist by ACAMDEMIC definition is one who believes that atleast one god exists. How do you reconcile these two statements
हमारे बुद्ध भगवान भी तो यही सब मानते थे
चाहे महिला को लेकर हो दलित जाति को लेकर हो 😢😢
@@madhusudanmunda3055 kaha likha hai ki budhh bhagwan hai?
Ya phir buddh ko follow nahi karoge to agle janm "paap" yoni prapt hogi Aisa likha hai kya kahi?
Khud ka dimag chalao
@@yourguyin2554 बौद्ध ग्रंथ में लिखा है बुद्ध भगवान है पत्थर में लिखा हुआ मिला वो भगवान है । भगवान बुद्ध महिलाओं को छोटा मानते है दलितों जाति को लेकर वो गलत कहते थे 🤣
@@madhusudanmunda3055 ok. Ab reference pochonga to baba ji ka thullu milega mujhe
@@yourguyin2554 भरहुत स्तुप में लिखा हुआ है जा खोज ले 🤣🤣 अब मत बोलना कैसे खोजे
I request you to call a normal people like us as well. I know this thing can't give you so much views but we can get to know what normal people are thinking just the way those youtubers are expressing themselves.
Waste of time
He's saying manusmriti mai sirf buri chize pakad ke uski acchi chize ko ignore kar rahe its applicable when wo kharab chize bohot kharab na ho it's ok if someone has a habit of laying but it's not ok if that guy is harming people jhut bolke kal ye bolega dawood ne 10 12 khun kiye hai par uski wajah se 100 logo ka pet bhi toh bhar Raha🤡
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....????
then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai....
for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad....
You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)?
question....
Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
Arpit explaine + bhargav joshi . Kesa rahenga😂???
Proud to be rational and atheist
❤
Konse Baman Propagandist bulaya hai tune?Jiske Baap Caste Privilege leke Caste ko deny karta hai...Yeh Pakka Pakka Proud Brhamin hoga
Bruh these all are academia stuffs
@@prasmitkumarpradhan1497yes "academia" stuff. Denying that caste system existed when there are literal genetic studies to show that endogamy (marrying within a group/tribe/caste) has been a thing for atleast 2 millennia. On top of that, we also have memetic evidence in the form of multiple casteist verses in bhagvad geeta, or casteist rules in manu and other smritis.
What ,ore do you need? If that is not enough, ask government to release stunted growth, malnourishment caste wise data. You will find the systemic oppresion that SCs STs and OBCs have faced in the name of Hindu god/s
@@yourguyin2554 he never denied lol are you ambedkarite? And talking about academia the genetic shows that the intermixing happened with all no pure race exist which concluded that in early vedic period caste dynamic was fluid
@@yourguyin2554oh really Nice Joke kiddo literally cast system came with Britisher's to Divide India Just like they did In Africa with Hutis ans Tutsis . And don't follow False translation by Missionaries and Others .If you want to read follow real Books and till 1884 there was no caste but Varna .Do home works and then speak about others 😂
@@yourguyin2554 2 Milleneia Bla bla Bla You don't even Know what Haploids are
In India why there have been social reformers in the in past.....
Yes there were social reforms in past like one who opposed modern caste system but also opposed the comunist views of ambedkar
Advice bro host thoda to gyan rakh
Vimoh I think yeh bol rha tha ki real society mein log academic definition use nhi karte. So Bhargava shud articulate things in practical ways. Tum har insaan ko weight ka unit bolte toh nahi ghumonge na 😅😅😅
Vimoh don't even know basics of Vedic religion 😂😂😂
He's some wikipedia guy 😂😂😂
He runs from debate
@@MohommadAnsari-i9k stop liking your own comment😂
@@electrondynamics9721just like u did
Science journy sir ko a bar aap ke chal baat kar mein bhulaye
Tm sanatan samiksha k pas jao beta....bhimtal chimta...
Tripitaka m kya hai ye sabko pta hai
All religions are misogynistic and obviously manusmriti isn't misogyny 😢
The real question: is manusmirti even important to Hinduism?
Bhai mein to padhunga manusmriti@@Krishsagar852
@@Krishsagar852 the real question is what is Hinduism
@@Jatin-o6j don't, read upanishads instead
@@shiroyasha_007 Collection of different philosophies and beliefs.
Go for arpit explain....
Vimoh ko ek baar aur lao yaar. 😢
34:45 is it coz of any context that happened due to that period
Coz even in hadiths of quran there are verses where muhamed bhai respects other religions or other gotras of that place but what was becoz of the time before mecca war when muhamed bhai had nothing he had to be diplomatic to gain trust and power like modi collabing with bihar and naidu sab
But after mecca war it was all genocide of people and elimination of gotra religions which existed their for thousands of years
Kuch bhi,,, kuch bhiii, kuch bhii...
Kons a Hadid me phrases hai ye quote kar ke bas man Jaunga .ye sab Kalpanik Kissa kisi aur ko sunana idhar hag mat 🤮
Project satyaloka ❌ Librandu धुलाई सेंटर ✅💀
bhai librandu left logon ko bola jata he social media pe shayad... ye bhai toh poora hamara hi right wing banda he re|igious guy, toh kuch sense nhi bana raha apka comment!
English achha bol lete ho aur pseudoscience bhi
Hindu apologist. He isnt even good at it, if you want proper apologist look into right wing media, you will way better defences of hinduism and how the caste didnt originate from it.
@@TheSumitKataria all the Hindu apologists have been shafted by the Puri Shankaracharya RUclips channel 😭😭. Are they going to claim now that they know more shatras than him?
Their new jumla is saying that English/Portuguese started the caste system (as caste is an English word). This is same as saying before Newton there was no gravity. 😂
Really proof me about casteism from scriptures@@yourguyin2554
He is an agnostic hindu not a hindu apologist.
@@kshatriyafied there is no such thing as agnostic "hindu". To be hindu of any kind you have to defend the karma-punar janm-guna-dharma concept. Which makes you an apologist.
@@yourguyin2554 he has an affinity towards hindusim and hindu culture since he belongs to that. He is agnostic. Veer savarkar was also an atheist but gave his hindutva philosophy.
Host is knowledgeless. Bharag is not accurately current on text, history, and scientific position also.
He criticize vimoh on academic theory and he himself and answering on this example vimoh not take position on atheism and he take taking position on ramayan, Mahabharat , manusmiti etc ...
Pure economics/ Keshav Bedi ko bulo
🙃
Ignore nille kabootar 😂😂😂Unki jal rahi hogi
Is bhai ne chasni to bahut lapeti h lekin baaten sirf anuman ke adhar pr ki hain ye bhi pseudoscience hi haank gya 😂😂😂😂😂
There are many contradictions in quran and bible too.....But that doesn't stops anyone to say these are bullsh*t....????
then what's the point to say ki galat likha hai par achcha bhi toh likha hai hence....ye achcha book hai....
for anything to be true or good it has to be all good or all true.....unless they are false or bad....
You can't be like islam says surname change karne ki zaroorat nahi hai hence it gives equality .....no it blames women for r*pes (why didn't they wore burkha)?
question....
Islam and christianity also talks about duty.... So are they dharmic??
Great.... ❤