Does Sanatana Dharma Call All Women Prostitutes, As MP Thirumavalavan Claims?

Thol. Thirumavalavan, PhD, is the Member of Parliament from Chidambaram constituency and part of the United Progressive Alliance in Tamil Nadu. He is the leader of Viduthalai Chiruthaikal Katchi (Liberation Panthers Party, VCK).

In January 2019, he conducted a conference declaring he would 'destroy' Sanatana Dharma. The conference was attended by representatives from Congress, CPI and CPI(M), along with Muslim communal parties.

Since then, Thirumavalavan has been spearheading a hate campaign often resorting to cheap and vulgar attacks on Hinduism.

Through this campaign, he has reduced Dr. Ambedkar, an intellectual giant and a great nation-builder, to the level of E.V. Ramasamy, an uncouth pseudo-rationalist, racist demagogue and hate-peddler in the minds of the public.

His claim: ‘According to Sanatana Dharma, all women are created as prostitutes’

Recently, in an online video published by ‘Periyar TV’, Thirumavalavan has again made disparaging remarks against Hindu Dharma.

In the video that went viral, he had said this:

Naturally, this has led to a severe backlash in social media. Alarmed at the outrage now, Thirumavalavan has made his counter-attack blaming Manu Smriti and launching an agitation demanding its ban, claiming the book has verses that demean women leading to their enslavement.

To justify his hate speech, he has highlighted verses 9:14 and 15 of Manusmriti. Incidentally, all the three verses from 9:14 to 16 are disparaging of women. Let us see them in full:

How does one justify such views of women in the Manusmriti?

One does not. Such views were common in pre-modern days of patriarchy in all cultures.

In fact, what distinguishes Hindu Sanatana Dharma is that it not only contains emancipating verses against abuse and belittling of women, but out of all the major religions, it is in Hindu Dharma alone we have verses which glorify the independent and fierce nature of women.

In Manu itself, there are verses which strictly warn against the abuse of women — including psychological abuse like this one:

Manu speaks against widow remarriage; frowns upon leviratic union and yet provides legal dimensions of inheritance of leviratic union. So how does one reconcile these aspects of Manu?

Taking these very specific verses, Indologist Patrick Olivelle explains:

Unfortunately, on both sides of the divide, there are people who take the verses literally.

While in the Hindu side, the literalists of Smritis are more a fringe than mainstream, in the case of most components of the UPA — in whose alliance VCK and DMK are members — the mainstream tendency is to demonise Hindu Dharma with such rotten-cherry picked verses.

If you want to imitate Sri Krishna's Rasaleela, also lift Govardhan Mountain

So goes an old saying. Those who want to imitate an early episode in Dr. Ambedkar’s life of burning of Manu Smriti should also, like him, have the ability to go through the very same Smritis to show the space for egalitarian human progress in them.

Even Dr. Ambedkar, when considering the patriarchal biases in Manu as reason for the downfall of women, was careful not to essentialise the entire Sanatana Dharma. Rather, he pointed to the high place Vedic society had accorded women. In the very paper condemning Manu, he substantially highlighted this aspect:

Dr. Ambedkar, while condemning what he discovered as discriminatory and unjust in Manu Smriti nevertheless used it for the empowerment of women.

The Parliamentary debates on Hindu Civil Code Bill demonstrate how Dr. Ambedkar understands Manu:

One should note here that Dr. Ambedkar puts Manu in correct perspective. The British Privy Council, intentionally to justify its 'civilising' mission, allowed every sort of social stagnation to prevail, while not allowing us to study properly laws as laid down by our Rishis and our Smritikars.

As every child knows, Sanatana Dharma predicates itself on Srutis, Vedas and not on Smritis.

To essentialise Sanatana Dharma based on culled-out Smriti verses is nothing but pathological mischief done with malicious intent.

Hindus, at large, should realise this crucial difference between Dr. Ambedkar, a genuine lover of Dharma and Rashtra despite his harsh words and those who are using his name only for their anti-Hindu agenda being the paid agents of Breaking India forces.

Buddha, Thomas Aquinas and Women

The pathological perversion exhibited by Thol. Thirumavalavan has been already diagnosed by historian and author Sitaram Goel as below:

Here, the perversion is even deeper because he promotes Buddhism, even as Buddhism contains equally disparaging passages about women in its canonical texts.

When Ananda wonders why women are not sitting in the courts of justice, Buddha states that, by nature, women are not only deficient in wisdom, but are also behave in an unrestrained way, are greedy and jealous (Aṅguttara Nikāya II.82–83).

In Pali Buddhist literature, Jatajatthavannana women are described as with 'insatiable sexual appetites' (120, I.440).

Another text 'Bodhisattvabhumi' gives as reason — 'all women are by nature full of defilement and of weak intelligence' — to explain why a Bodhisattva would not be born a woman.

According to Buddhaghosa, a great Theravada Buddhist scholar of the fifth century, a woman would be born a man if the woman lives a Dharmic life. A man would be born a woman because he had indulged in sensual pleasure.

While we all associate Zen with novel meditation and Satori transcending all barriers, traditional Zen mostly considered women as naturally gravitating towards blood pool hell unless Zen masters intervene through rituals.

But none demands that these Buddhist literatures be banned , burnt or the idols of the Buddhas be smashed.

Because, we understand that in the larger context, Buddhism is dynamic enough and greater and deeper than these texts. Unless there is an ulterior aim of destroying Buddhism, none will think of essentialising Buddhism with the above elements in its texts.

Same is the case with Christianity. Thomas Aquinas, arguably the most brilliant of Christian theologians, stated that the inferiority of women is not just because Eve allowed herself to be seduced by the serpent and manipulated Adam into disobedience, but because she was inferior in her very creation.

Though every Christian student of theology has to study Thomas Aquinas to this day, and there may even exist significant number of fringe theologians justifying this inferiority of women through Biblical fundamentalism, no academician or politician would ask a ban on the works of Thomas Aquinas or burn in public his works.

Such juvenile pathological hatred is unfortunately but by design, considered progressive in India.

Still, there exists the problem of Thirumavalavan’s claim that Sanatana Dharma declares that God created all women as prostitutes. So let us look at what actually one of the major Puranas has to say on the creation of women.

Creation of Women: Christian Mythology and Hindu Purana — a comparison:

Actually, the Christian theological presentation of the creation myth of Bible, which is fundamental to Christian theology, is not only disparaging towards women, but makes her suffer a guilt baggage.

Biblical Scholar Athalya Brenner writes what this mythology meant for the women living under the patriarchal Church:

Now let us see what Siva Maha Purana has to say about creation of women, as the text deals specifically and elaborately with the subject.

The subsequent verses and narrative are based on Vayaviya-Samhita of the Purana — Chapters 15, 16 and 17. (Translation J.L.Shastri, Motilal Banarsidas, 1950)

Brahma was dissatisfied with his asexual creation so he meditated upon Siva and praised Him.

On seeing the female form, Brahma praised Siva-Shakti thus:

Though the Purana speaks of the glory of Siva Mahadeva, it does not in anyway makes the Goddess inferior to Siva as She emanates from Him:

Now Brahma requests the Goddess to provide the power to create the female race:

And it is from this Goddess that Brahma could create the race of women. If one has perspective enough to look into the reality contained in the Puranic language, one can see very well that Sanatana Dharma does not or even suggest that women are born as prostitutes, but as the form of the Goddess.

Women's emancipation is an important and essential part of the progress of any society.

We cannot allow malicious and pathological 'Breaking India' forces exploit it for their own perversions.

Those who really contributed to the progress of women in social as well as spiritual domains, from Sarada Devi, Harbilas Sharda, Sister Nivedita, Sister Subbulakshmi, Dr. Muthulakshmi, Swami Sahajananda, Swami Shraddhanand to Mata Amritanandamayi — they have drawn their strength from Sanatana Dharma, Vedic Dharma.