Response to Vedkabhed on paedophilia in Hinduism.

In this blog I am again going to expose Suleiman Rizvi's (Vedkabhed author) another blog on Paedophilia in Hinduism. 

First he gave some refrences of Child marriage in India and blamed hinduism for this. So according to author all wrong things in India is are because of hindus. Author is not ready to accept that India is secular because of Hindu majority but he is ready to blame hindus for every wrong custom. Now as per the same logic I can accuse Islam. According to a report by UNICEF, Bangladesh has highest rate of Child marriage in Asia. India has highest no. of child marriage because of high population (China not submits it's data to UN). As per UNICEF 70 percent girls are married before 16 in Pakistan.

A further 10 million underage girls marry every year — one every three seconds, according to ICRW. The legal age to marry in Pakistan is 18 for boys, but 16 for girls, though they can’t drive, vote, or open a bank account until adulthood. According to UNICEF, 70 per cent of girls in Pakistan are married before then.

 In Iran the marriageable age for girls is 13 years and they are planning to lower it to 9. 

In Islam, the custom of marrying a child was started by Prophet Muhammad himself;

Narrated `Aisha:

that the Prophet (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

Note:- First I will expose the refrences in support of paedophilia he gave from Hindu scriptures, and then I will cross check the examples he gave.

Hindu scriptures promoting paedophilia

Before I begin to explain this, I would like to explain what is Pedophile. Pedophilia means sexually attracted towards pre-pubescent girls and having any sort of sexual relationship with them. Such a thing is sinful according to Hinduism. Because though marriage happened before a girl attained her age, both the boy and the girl will start living together only after she has attained puberty fully. The following is the meaning of the Vedic mantras which are supposed to be chanted by groom at the time when a bride comes to his home or at the time of marriage in advance:

Rig Veda 10.85.40-41“Soma obtained her first of all; next the Gandharva was her lord. Agni was thy third husband: now one born of woman is thy fourth. Soma to the Gandharva, and to Agni the Gandharva gave: And Agni hath bestowed on me riches and sons and this my spouse.”

These verses are also repeated in Atharva Veda Book 14. These verses simply say Soma was a girl’s first husband, her second husband was Gandharva, her third husband was Agni and now, this human being (i.e, groom, born of a woman) is her fourth husband. Now, what do the Soma, Gandharva, Agni here represent?

Padma Purana V.118.2-15 “..When small hair appears (on the private parts), Soma enjoys a daughter. When she attains puberty, gandharvas (enjoy her); and when the breasts appear (prominent), Fire (enjoys her)…”

This reference from Padma Purana simply equate every girl with god Soma during the time when a girl has her Pubarche (body hair started appearing at this time). Similarly this verse associate every girl with Gandharva during her Thelarche (age of puberty, breasts started appearing) and finally every girl is associated with god Agni from the period of Menarche till three years. Menarche here represents the time when she started getting her first period after her breasts become somewhat prominent. From the month in which she started getting her first periods and till the end of the third year, Agni enjoys a daughter. Thereafter only a groom who married her is allowed to live with her. In other words, only after the expiry of the third year from the day in which a daughter started getting her periods, a couple should live together. It means Hinduism doesn’t support pedophilia. It only supports child marriage. The author, however, considers these Rig Veda verses as different gods impregnating same woman in the article “Hinduism exposed obscenity in Vedas”, which is complete bullshit. Even there is no reference for gods impregnating any woman in Rig Veda 10.85.37. Let’s deviate from topic for a short while, since the Rig Veda verses provided by Mr. Sulaiman Razvi in that article is somehow related to pedophilia in Hinduism.

Some Arya Samaj scholars somehow tried to link this marriage hymn with Niyoga, which is absolutely baseless. He also claimed that according to Rig Veda 10.85.37, Pusan impregnated woman, which is also baseless if you read the translation of Wilson(which is provided by him):

Rig Veda 10.85.37 “Pusan, inspire her who is most auspicious, in whom men may sow seed, who most affectionate. May be devoted to us, and in whom animated by desire we may beget progeny.”

This verse looks like a prayer towards Pusan to inspire her(woman). Nowhere this verse says Pusan impregnated inside woman. It clearly says “in whom men may sow seed”. The men here denotes humans.

The marriage mantra is same for all type of marriages and for remarriages too, whether it is a boy or girl. One may raise an objection that if in case a woman remarried, how this mantra is applicable as it says Soma was your first husband, Gandharva was your second, Agni was your third and now I am your fourth. I mean if a woman remarried, her first human husband should be her fourth after she was enjoyed by those three Devatas and now the boy whom she is remarrying should be considered as fifth. However, that is not the case. In case of remarriage, her previous husband is equated with Agni and whatever days she spent with him she would be considered as enjoyed by Agni in addition to those three years.

Now, let’s come back to the topic Pedophilia in Hinduism.

A boy is supposed to undergo Upanayana ceremony when he became eight years old and then he should live in his Guru’s house from the time of his first Upakarma till the end of his study. Similarly, the perfect age for marriage of girls according to Hinduism is eight years. So, both the boy and girl are treated somewhat equally here.

Coming to the point about Scriptures which says even a twenty four years old man can marry a eight years old girl, etc;

Manu Smriti 9.94 “A man, aged thirty years, shall marry a maiden of twelve who pleases him, or a man of twenty-four a girl eight years of age; if (the performance of) his duties would (otherwise) be impeded, (he must marry) sooner.”

Vishnu Purana 3.10 If he marry, he must select a maiden who is of a third of his age

Mahabharata 13.44.13 “A person of thirty years of age should wed a girl of ten years of age called a Nagnika. Or, a person of one and twenty years of age should wed a girl of seven years of age.”

These verses simply mean every boy should marry a girl who is younger than him and shouldn’t be taken literally. I am reproducing what Medhatithi said in his commentary on Manusmriti 9.94:

What the injunction means is that the maiden married should be so much younger than the man;—and not that marriage must be done only at. the age stated. Nor is any stress meant to be laid upon the exact number of years mentioned; all that is meant is that one should many a girl very much younger than himself. This injunction does not occur in the section dealing with Marriage; hence, what is stated here cannot he regarded as a qualification of the persons undergoing that sacrament, and consequently, as an essential factor in the rite itself; for this same reason, it cannot be taken as precluding the age of ‘ten’ or ‘twenty-five’ or such others.

“But it is often found that even though laid down in a distinct passage, a detail does form an essential factor of an act”

True; but the very fact that the teacher has thought it fit to place the present text apart from the section on marriage is clearly indicative of the fact that he had some special purpose in this. The practice of cultured men is also as we have stated. Further, the age here stated can never be observed in the case of one’s son marrying a second time; so that, if the injunction were meant to be taken literally, it would mean that there should be no second marriage; and this would be absurd.

There is another reason to say Hinduism doesn’t accept pedophilia. Because when mentioning the six types of Stri Dhana (properties of a woman), clearly both marriage and bride coming to groom’s home are separated:

Agni Purana 209.27 “Women property is said to be of six kinds;- gift made to a woman at the time of marriage, gift made to a woman at the time of leaving her father’s house for her husband’s house, gifts made by her husband out of love or affection, and gifts got from the brother, mother or father”

If a bride is supposed to go to her husband’s house on the day of her marriage, just like how it happens today when marriages are conducted after girls reaching 20+ ages, there is no need to separate “gift made to a woman at the time of marriage” from “gift made to a woman at the time of leaving her father’s house for her husband’s house”.

Vishnu Smriti makes it clear that only those girls are considered degraded who haven’t given in marriage before they started menstruating, it doesn’t say keeping a married daughter who started menstruating in father’s home is degraded. It is because a girl has to stay in father’s home after her marriage till she completes her third year after she started menstruating, as we seen earlier.

Vishnu Smriti 24.41. A damsel whose menses begin to appear (while she is living) at her father’s house, before she has been betrothed to a man, has to be considered as a degraded woman: by taking her (without the consent of her kinsmen) a man commits no wrong.

Note: Remember, Pre-pubescent girls don’t menstruate and Hindu scriptures clearly say from the day in a month in which a woman gets her period till the end of sixteenth day is said to be the season of a woman. That too, first four days, 11th and 13th day are forbidden for a husband to have intercourse with her and on the rest 10 days he can have. So, Hinduism doesn’t encourage intercourse with Pre-Pubescent girls. Now let's have a look on examples of paedophilia he gave from scriptures.

Rama married six years old Sita

He gave the following refrence from Ramayana.

Valmiki Ramayana, Aranya Kanda 3, Sarga 47, Verses 3-11 “I am the daughter of noble-souled Janaka, the king of Mithila, by name I am Seetha, and the dear wife and queen of Rama, let safety betide you. On residing in the residence of Ikshvaku-s in Ayodhya for twelve years, I was in sumptuosity of all cherishes while relishing all humanly prosperities. In the thirteenth year the lordly king Dasharatha deliberated together with his imperial ministers to anoint Rama as Crown Prince of Ayodhya. When Raghava’s anointment was being organised my venerable mother-in-law known as Kaikeyi begged her husband Dasharatha for a boon. Restraining my veracious father-in-law by a good deed once done by her in his respect, Kaikeyi besought two boons from him, namely expatriation of my husband, and anointment of her son Bharata. ‘If Rama is anointed now, come what may I will not eat, sleep, or drink, and my life ends this way,’ thus Kaikeyi was adamantine, and the king and my father-in-law entreated her who is nagging with meaningful riches, but she did not make good on that entreaty. My great-resplendent husband was of twenty-five years of age at that time, and to me eighteen years are reckoned up from my birth.” 

However, I don't agree with this translation. When Sage Vishwamitra came to Dasharatha for help of Lord Rama, he said;

ऊनषोडशवर्षो मे रामो राजीवलोचन:। न युद्धयोग्यतामस्य पश्यामि सह राक्षसै:।।

My lotus-eyed son Rama is around sixteen years. I do not think he has ability to fight with the rakshasas in a battle.[1:20:2]

Una is used to indicate gap of a margin. It means Lord Rama was just 1-2 year younger than 16 at the time when Vishwamitra came to Dasharatha. According to Ramyana 3.47.10, the age gap between Rama and Sita was; 25-18=6 years. So, it means at the time of marriage if Sita was 6 years old, Lord Rama should be of 12, than it will contradict Ramayana 1:20:2. And if Sita was of 6 years at the time of marriage, what was the age of Shrutkirti? 2 years? Definitely not.

Let give you the correct translation of Ramyana 3:47:4-5;

उषित्वा द्वा दश समा इक्ष्वाकुणां निवेशने। भुञ्जाना मानुषान्भोगान्सर्वकामसमृद्धिनी।।

She had been in Ikshwaku dynasty of King Dashratha for two years and got all the materialistic pleasure available for human kind.

ततस्त्रयोदशे वर्षे राजामन्त्रयत प्रभुः। अभिषेचयितुं रामं समेतो राजमन्त्रिभिः।।

Thereafter, in the third year, the king and lord Dasaratha consulted other kings and ministers to consecrate Rama.

NOTE: Here दश is not used for ten but for Dashratha.

Hence Sita's age at the time of marriage was; 18-2=16 not 18-12=6.

Krishna married eight years old Rukmini and many prepubescent girls

First let me give the proof that Rukmini was a fully grown maiden at the time of marriage.

Brahma Vaivarta Purana Krishna Janma Khanda 105:112;

It is clearly written that Rukmini had attained puberty. In Harivamsa Prava, her age is given 16.

kR^iShNena manasA dR^iShTAM durnirIkShyAM surairapi ||2-59-37 shyAmAvadAtA sA hyAsItpR^ithuchArvAyatekShaNA |

She who was difficult to be seen even by deva-s, was seen by kR^iShNa with his mind. She was of sixteen years old. She was of white complexion. Her eyes were long and beautiful.

 Now I want to present the Sanskrit verse oft he Skanda Purana that he gave as refrence.

The Sanskrit words used there to say she has come to the age of eight years are “sA kAla paryAya Adashtavarsha”. Here sA means she, Kala means time, paryAya means lapse of a particular time. But in the term “Adashta varsha”, the word Ad (आद) is ignored while translating and only ashtavarsha is translated as eight years old. But the prefix आद clearly here denotes some other thing like she has become twice eight years old or two plus eight(i.e., ten) years old. So, we can’t conclude that Rukmini’s age was eight when she married Krishna with this verse. And the verse from Harivamsa clearly say that she was of 16. Now the next proof he gave is totally bogus. He showed Brahma Vaivarta Purana, Krishna Janma Khanda 105.1-10  and said that Rukmini was engaged in playing it means she was a child. Seriously? Well from the same chapter I proved that Rukmini was a fully grown maiden. Then he quoted S.B. 10:53:51, translated by sanyal and claimed that Rukmini had not attained puberty. I am giving the word by word translation of that verse. There is no word which can be translated as she had not attained the age of puberty. 

तां देवमायामिव धीरमोहिनीं

सुमध्यमां कुण्डलमण्डिताननाम् ।

श्यामां नितम्बार्पितरत्नमेखलां

व्यञ्जत्स्तनीं कुन्तलशङ्कितेक्षणाम् ।

शुचिस्मितां बिम्बफलाधरद्युति-

शोणायमानद्विजकुन्दकुड्‍मलाम् ॥ ५१ ॥

tām — her; deva — of the Supreme Lord; māyām — the illusory potency; iva — as if; dhīra — even those who are sober; mohinīm — who bewilders; su-madhyamām — whose waist was well-formed; kuṇḍala — with earrings; maṇḍita — decorated; ānanām — whose face; śyāmām — uncontaminated beauty; nitamba — on whose hips; arpita — placed; ratna — jewel-studded; mekhalām — a belt; vyañjat — budding; stanīm — whose breasts; kuntala — of the locks of her hair; śaṅkita — frightened; īkṣaṇām — whose eyes; śuci — pure; smitām — with a smile; bimba-phala — like a bimba fruit; adhara — of whose lips; dyuti — by the glow; śoṇāyamāna — becoming reddened; dvija — whose teeth; kunda — jasmine; kuḍmalām — like buds;

Look no word can be translated as she had not attained the age of puberty. 

Shiva’s marriage with Parvati

In Skanda Purana I.i.23.3-9, it is written that Parvati was sitting in her father's lap. So the author concluded that Parvati was a child. Now let me show you something. 

And, O Yudhishthira, while at intervals of business, I went out (of the inner apartments) and sat on the lap of my father, that learned Brahmana used to recite unto me these truths, sweetly consoling me therewith!" Vana Parva 32:62

These are words of Draupadi. Now we all know Draupadi was born as a young grown maiden from sacrifice of Drupada. It means she was never a child still she sat at lap of her father. So concluding that Parvati was a child is totally nonsense. Then he gave some refrences and claimed that Parvati was 8 years old when she started doing penance for getting Lord Shiva as her husband. He further said; Parvati along with her father went to Shiva’s abode when she was eight years old, the duration of her penance is not mentioned so let’s assume that she performed penance for a year or let’s say for four years. 

Suleiman is expert in lieing because the duration of Parvatis penance is given in Skanda Purana 6:1:257:18

18. The Lord will grant the greatest knowledge in the form of the entire Brahman. Do perform the Japa of the twelve-syllabled Mantra in the course of crores of Brahmakalpas.

In Shiva Purana Rudra Samhita, Parvati Khanda, 2:3:22:52

Pārvatī thus spent three thousand years in the penance-grove performing penance and meditating on lord Śiva. 

It means she was not 8 years old in any sense at time of marriage with Lord Shiva. Then he gave refrence of Banana Purana which is not related to Shiva's marriage with Parvati.

Now I have answered all his bogus claims. Please share my blog so that more and more people can come here to read it..🙏