An analysis of the severe restrictions enforced upon women in Hinduism. The stripping of property, destruction of womens’ independance, strict dress and veiling codes crushed women to the status of animals.  

Genocide of Women in Hinduism  by Sita Agarwal. Chapter 4

In this chapter I shall analyse how the cunning Brahmins used slow and stealthy means of destroying women which are completely justified in the Hindu scriptures (Vedas and Puranas). This they did by several cruel methods : 

  • Forcefully confiscating any property women could have. 
  • Enforcing the debilitating dowry system which forced women to pay huge sums of money upon marriage. 
  • Locking women up at home and not permitting them to leave the house. 
  • Denying women the basic right to education and maintaining them in a state of enforced illiteracy. 

To understand the cruel and inhuman treatment of women in Hinduism one must understand how Hinduism originated. As evident from the synonym for `astik’ (orthodox) Hinduism, namely Brahmanism, Hinduism is nothing but Brahmin Imperialism. The Brahmins destroyed several independant `nastik’ religions such as Buddhism, Shaivism, Tantrism and Jainism by submerging them into the Brahmanic soup. In order to gain followers and to convert the followers of `nastik’ (heterodox) faiths such as Tantrism, Shaivism and Shaktism to astik Brahmanism, the Brahmins had to somehow subjugate the nastikas. One of the main methods by which this was achieved was by the crushing of women of non-Brahmin races. Thus, the religion of Brahmanism was propagated by a band … 


In order to remove the last vestige of womens’ independance and crush them to the status of sub-humans, the Vedic and Vaishnava religions stripped women of all properties. Thus, the most authoritative Vaishnavite law-book states that women cannot have any property : 

Manu VIII.416 " A wife, a son, and a slave, these three are declared to have no property ; the wealth which they earn is (acquired) for him to whom they belong."  

The term `to whom they belong’ indicates that women were, in effect, mere chattel, machines for labour. This verse from the Manu Smrti, the supreme lawbook for the 6 orthodox (`astika’) sects of Brahmanism, sums up the status of women in Orthodox Hinduism. Women were in effect, mere slaves incapable of owning property. These laws were enforced by the Brahmins in order to make women depend on men for their whole lives. 


The true ugly nature of Hinduism is revealed by the savage manner by which the independance of women was destroyed. All aspects of feminine independance are annihilated in Hinduism : 

Manu V.148 " In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a women must never be independant."  

A woman is thus declared to be innately unfit for independance. Thus, the Brahmin sage Manu states in his law-book, the most important in Hinduism : 

Manu Smrti IX.3 " Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects (her) in youth, and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never fit for independance." 

The Hindu-Aryan woman is thus never to be left alone, she is declared to be "unfit for independance". The Brahmins claim divine justification for their dastardly acts against women by inventing `holy’ verses. One of the main reasons why the Brahmins enforced these ghastly restrictions of women is that they thereby enfeebled the non-Brahmin females, leading to the deterioration of the non-Brahmin races. 


As another aspect of Brahmanic brainwashing of men against women, the Aryan Brahmins corrupted the minds of the women themselves in order to complete their enslavement from within. Thus, women were reduced to the status of mindless machines. In this the doctrine of reincarnation came in handy. Besides legalising apartheid by claiming that Sudroids were suffering for their sins in past births, it legitmised the most oppressive discrimination against women by claiming that the females were born to suffer on account of their sins in a last birth ! They were threatened with harsh punishments in later lives if they dared to oppose Brahmin laws : 

Manu Smrti V.164 " By violating her duty towards her husband, a wife is disgraced in this world, (after death) she enters the womb of a jackal, and is tormented by diseases (as the punishment of) her sin."  

In this manner women are crushed in Hinduism, and in this manner they still remain in the most hopeless state of degradation. The Brahmins brainwashed the women into believing that they would be reborn as jackals if they did not submit … Once again, the Brahmin-invented curse of reincarnation ! 

Whatever defects her husband may have, the wife must unquestioningly obey him and worship him as a god : 

Manu Smrti V.154 " Though destitute of virtue, or seeking pleasure (elsewhere); or devoid of good qualities, (yet) a husband must be constantly worshipped as a god by a dutiful wife."  

This proves that the Hindu woman must constantly worship her husband as a deity. … 


The Vedas prescribe that a dowry be given by the bride’s family to the groom. The Rig Veda states that cows and gifts given by the Aryan father of the bride to the daughter accompanied the bride’s procession [ Rg Ved X.85 ] [ Apte 12 ]. Kakshivat in the Vedas says he became rich by the father-in-law giving him 10 chariots and maids and 1060 cows during the marriage ceremony [ Rg Ved I.126 ] [ Apte 13 ]. Dowry is referred to as `Streedhana’ and is an ancient practice [ Docu ]. This custom implied that women were, in addition to being viewed as mere sex objects, severe economic liabilities for the parents. Indeed, the Brahmins raised the level of dowry to such ridiculous levels that the nonBrahmins were forced to murder their female children or face economic ruin. In this manner, the non-Brahmins exterminated their own females, perpetuating Brahmin dominance. We see this philosophy in action today. Over the last 50 years, more than 50 million female children were murdered as a result of Vedic dowry and infanticide laws (see chapter 1). 

The ancient Vedic custom of kanyadan, where the father presented his daughter with jewelry and clothes at the time of her marriage, and vardakshina where the father presented the groom with cash and kind are, in essence the dowry system. This curse is fully sanctioned in the Vedas. These examples show that dowry was practiced in ancient times. Thus, in order to marry Sita to `godly’ Rama, her father had to supply her with 100 crores of gold mohurs, 10000 carriages, 10 lakh horses, 60000 elephants, 100000 male slaves, 50000 female slaves, 2 crores of cows and 100000 pearls, and many other items [ Ram.wh 61 ]. Thus, dowry, which is the very root of the Hindu evils of sati and bride-burning, is given `divine’ santion by the `noble’ Hindu gods. 


It may be thought that only the absence of the husband could temporarily alleviate the condition of Aryan women. Alas, even then she was under constant suspicion. To prevent nightly intrigues, she cannot even sleep alone:  " whilst her husband is absent, she shall sleep with one of her female relatives and not alone "  [ DuB. quoting from Vasishta’s Padma Purana, DuB.p.349 ] 

This verse clearly shows that a Hindu wife has no freedom even when her husband is away. She is always carefully watched by a female relative. Husbands are not supposed to have intercourse with a wife who bore only daughters [ Jolly ]. This was part of the institutionalised discrimination against females in Hinduism. 


Such is the abject state of degradation of women in Hinduism that even the most basic rights are taken away. These include the right to read, and even the right to live. Thus, women and Sudras were declared to be unfit for study of the Vedas as per the Holy Hindu scriptures : 

Bhag.Pur. I.4.25 : " And as women, Sudras and the inferior members of the twice-borne classes were unfitted for hearing the Veda, and were infatuated in desiring the blessings, arising from the ceremonies, the muni, with a vision to their felicity, in his kindness composed the narrative called the Mahabharata."   [ Bhag.Pur. I.4.25 ] [ Muir III,p.42 ] 

The terms like `avarodhika’, `avarodhavadhu’, which are frequently applied to women in Indo-Aryan literature show that women were not given any social freedom at all [ 1200, p.71 ] [ Sis. XII.20.7 ]. Vachaspati speaks of a `kulavadhu’, another synonym for `woman’, as meaning `invisible to the Sun; [ Vach. p.73 ] [ 1200 p.71 ]. These metaphors indicate that Hindu women were essentially prisoners permanently locked up at home. 

Also Madhava Acharya stated that " they [ women and Sudras ] are debarred … from being competent students of the Veda" [ Vedarthaprakasha of Madhava Acharyya on the Taittriya Yajur Veda, quoted in Muir III,p.66 ] This clearly shows that Hindu women cannot, by any long shot, study the Vedas. Those who think otherwise are under delusion. 

The Nambudiri Brahman women are a good example of the inuman restrictions placed on Aryan women regarding going out and leaving the house. The Smarta Shankaracharya laid down that: 

  • Brahman women must not look at any persons other than their       husbands.
  • Brahman women must not go out, unless        accompanied by women servants.
  • Brahman women must wear only white clothing."    — [ Thurs.5.189 ].

These acts were designed to satisfy the beastly lusts of the Brahmin men.

Whilst Sudra women were forced to go about topless as a result of Hinduism,

Brahmin women were locked up at home, unable to go out. Thus , the lecherous Brahmin animals could satisfy their perverted sexual urges with non-Brahmin women ! These laws, enforced by Shankaracharya, were merely meant to perpetuate Brahmin racial dominance. 

Even the Kamasutra, the most liberal text, is highly restrictive for married women, prescribing that married ladies be chaste [ ks ] [ ks.rb ]. However, quoting the Kamasutra is not very helpful, since it was never a law-book; it was only a marriage manual for libertine Hellenised inhabitants of the North-West. 


All societies that grant basic human rights to women grant them the ability to divorce at least in the most severe cases of abuse or cruelty by the husband.

Islam does so, as do many societies at the lowest rungs of civilization. Yet even this right to escape from the clutches of a monster is taken away in animal Hinduism. Divorce was not permitted, and women were forced to stay with their husbands, no matter how cruel or ruthless they were. 


Even if the wife ran away from the harsh husband, she could never get remarried. Remarriage was explicitly ruled out for widows and women: 

  • Manu (V.157) states that a widow should never think of remarriage after her husband’s death [ 1200,p.69 ]. 
  • The Aditya Purana (XXI.14) also says that widow remarriage should not be perfomrd in the Kali age. [ 1200,p.69 ] 
  • If by a mistake or under some pressure a person married a widow, he had to perform penance and abandon her as the marriage was invalid [ Laghu Ashvalayana XXI.6 ] [ 1200 p.69 ] 

These citations, from the `holy’ Hindu texts, clearly show the real status of women in this so-called `religion’. In order to strengthen this legislation, even the very offspring that a remarried woman may conceive were declared to be illegitimate : 

Manu Smrti.V.162 : " Offspring begotten by another man is here not (considered lawful), nor (does offspring begotten) on another man’s wife (belong to the begetter), nor is a second husband anywhere prescribed for virtuous women."  

But according to Narada (XII.97) it was permissible when the husband was unheard of, is dead, or becomes a sannyasi [ 1200 p.69 ]. But this and other instances (eg. Parasara Smrti and Agni Purana hold the same view) were not the rule as the scriptures quoted above have far more authority. The Manu Smrti is the absolute authority for the 6 `astika’ (orthodox) schools of Brahmanism; the others were merely followed by renegade Shakta and Tantra sects which were severely persecuted. Citing from Tantric texts in order to invent a non-existent liberal view of women in Hinduism is akin to quoting from witchcraft texts in order to fabricate a high status for women in Medieval Europe. Thus Manu strictly forbids widow re-marriage : 

Manu Smrti.IX.65 : " In the sacred texts which refer to marriage, the appointment (of widows) is nowhere mentioned, nor is the re-marriage of widows presented in the rules concerning marriage."