१८६२ का एक ऐसा केस, जिसने हिला दिया था पूरा देश | Maharaj Libel Case | Netflix's Maharaj Movie
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
- Aamir Khan’s son Junaid Khan is all set to make his debut with Maharaj. However, the film has been grabbing the headlines for all the wrong reasons as it has sparked controversy. As per reports, the Gujarat High Court has put a halt on the release of the film, amid allegations of hurting religious sentiments.
The Maharaj Libel Case was an 1862 trial in the Bombay Court (then just in transition from a Supreme Court to a High Court) in British India. The case was against Nanabhai Rustomji Ranina and Karsandas Mulji, they alleged that and their public accusation is that the religious leaders of Pushtimarg had sexual liaisons with women devotees, & it was libelous for petitioner.
#Maharajmoviereview #maharajnetflix #maharajreview #maharajfilmreview
#Janaidkhan #Maharahmovietrailer
BG Music Credit:
Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Unported - CC BY 3.0
Music promoted by Copyright Free Music - Background Music For Videos 👉 / @podcastbackgroundmusic
Note: - All Images, Pictures, Music used in the video belongs to the respected movie makers.
DISCLAIMER:
The views presented in the video are personal. I neither intend to blame anyone nor does anyone need to agree with this. This movie review delves into sentimental themes; viewer discretion is advised. Opinions expressed are subjective and may not reflect everyone's perspective. Spoilers might be disclosed. Each viewer's emotional response may differ.
The Film's trailer/teaser/songs Clips, TV series Clips, Web Series Clips, Animation Series Clips are solely for the purpose of explaining the Film, Web Series, Trailers and Songs, but all under section 107 of the copyright Act 1976. Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, often referred to as the "fair use" doctrine, outlines the conditions under which copyrighted material may be used for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research without the need for permission from or payment to the copyright holder.
Hello viewers,
I am not sure about the movie. Whether filmmakers have potrayed "Pushtimarg Sect" in wrong way in the film or not.
So, this video is not in support of the movie.
This video is made on the basis of publicly available documents related to this case.
Karsandas ji's fight was not against any sect., sanatan dharm or Hindu religion.
He himself was a Hindu and a devout Vaishnav. Saurabh Shah, who is the author of the novel named "Maharaj" which is based on this case is also a devout Vaishnav as per his recent tweet.
So, we have to understand that this case was not against Hindu religion or sanatan dharm or Pustimarg Samprday.
In my opinion, this case was a fight of good against bad.
Aur rahi baat muzse disagree karne ki,
Toh Asaram bapu ke bhakt toh abhi bhi unhe nirapradh hi mante hai aur bhagwan ke roop me hi dekhte hai.
Thanks! 😇
Bhai Mic Ma Kuch Kar Lo... Very Bad Audio
@@afroj.a1 ha bhai. Quality mic thoda mehnag ata hai.. but jald hi krunga woh bhi improve. Thanks for the feedback.
Please stop spreading misinformation about Karsandas Mulji. Karsandas Mulji was highly influenced by British Protestant Christianity. His work "Niti Vachan" or Moral training (1859) is full of his ideas of what reform to him meant i.e Christian Protestant ethics, virtues and self-discipline. So, his critique of the Pushtimarg was coming from a Christian perspective rather than from the view point a Hindu reformist saddened by the state of affairs in his religion. Also, the film has removed the character of John Wilson, a scottish christian missionary who was projected by the court as a indologist and a scholar of pushtimarg. During the trial, he made several objectionable remarks on Lord Krishna. Also, the judgement vilifies Krishna specifically and all Krishna Bhakti sampradyas in general by accusing them of being driven by lust and encouraging debauchery. Not to mention that the whole case was based on hearsay incidents narrated by witnesses like Lakshmidas Khimji and Mathuradas Lowjee. In short none of the witnesses actually saw the so called "charanseva". Hence, there were no "criminal charges" pressed against the maharaj, which is claimed in the movie.
We Hindus must understand that we don't have to be a fanatic like other religions, that's the beauty of Hindu, sikh and Buddhist religions, that we are opening to listening and reforming. There is nothing wrong with that.
Absolutely.
If we don't dare to be vocal against the adharma then we shouldn't call Ravan "king of evil" and also should not perform Ravan Dahan on Dashehara coz after all he was also a Brahmin and a Devout Shivbhakt.
But Hindu dharm and culture have always been vocal and stood against the evil and adharma.
Hope people understand it.
@@user-tp4cd6ox9k abhi abhi Hamare Baarah naam ki movie jispar stay lagaya tha woh release huyi. Kya woh bhi hamare dharm ke khilaf bani thi. Kashmir files, Kerala files bhi kya hamare dharm ke khilaf bani thi?
Uss movies me jo dikhaya woh kahi na kahi satya ghatnao par adharit tha. Aur agar use dikhaya toh problem nahi honi chahiye thi, aur huyi bhi nahi. Woh movies release ki gayi aur superhit bhi huyi.
So it is not just against Hindu dharm as u are saying.
Ye movie Hindu religion ke khilaf nahi hai... Understand it. Ye movie ek pakhandi Maharaj ke khilaf hai jo sadhu ke bhes me ek rakshas tha, aur uska bhanda bhi foda ek Vaishnav aur Hindu samaj ke insaan ne hi. Karsandas milji kisi aur dharm ke nahi the.
Mujhe muslim dharm se koi khasa lagav nahi hai dost, lekin jo galat hai woh galat hai.
Chahe apne dharm me ho ya kisi bhi.
Aur galat hai toh we have to accept it and stand against it.
Understand it and don't fall prey to politics. Woh toh dharm aur nafrat ke naam par rotiya senkte hai bas.
Jai Shrikrishna!
Point is that why there are no movies on Islamic intolerance?
महाराज जरूर देखिये... अपने परिवार को भी दिखाईये
ऐसी फिल्मे जरूर बननी चाहिये, अगर कोई रुकावटे पैदा करते है तो उसे प्रगति और् इन्सानियत का विरोधक मानना चाहिये
Dharm ke naam pr nafrat failane Walo ko ye baat smz aaye toh baat bane. 😅
Bhai me tumko kya bolu , is movie ko base banake ,ek bhaktimarg or hindu sadhu santo ko bura dikhane ka shadyantr he utna pata nahi chalta,1 case ya 1 sant bure ho sakte he par isse pure marg ko bura dikhaya jayega, wese wo mahraj wese nahi the .
Dost, phirse wohi batana chahta hu. Movie ban ho jaye ya nahi mujhe koi fark nahi padta. I am not supporting or advocating that movie here.
Lekin Saurabh Shah ki history dekhte huye, mujhe nahi lagta ki unhone bhi Hindu dharma ko galat limelight me dikhaya hoga. Woh toh hindutva ke leader Narendra Modi ji ke parambhakt hai.
And if u have watched the video, even I have not shared my opinion about any perticular sect. Or bhaktimarg.
Maine bas case ke bare me baat ki hai, aur woh bhi Jo facts available the uske through.
It is not against Hindu dharm Ye hame bhi smzna hoga.
Aur phirse bata raha hu, Asaram bapu ke bhakt bhi unhe abhi bhi bhagwan hi mante hai. Aur woh unki soch hai.
Jai Shrikrishna!
Bhai pehla movie aana toh diya kro pehla he case kardiya na trailer aaya tha
@@THeREVIEWMASTER123 exactly. Without watching the content banning it is completely wrong.
@@THeREVIEWMASTER123 movie banti hogi tab koi jagrut hindu hoga usne baat leak ki hogi, krishna bhagvan ke baare me bura bura describe karne ki koshish ki gai he,tabhi to ab tak trailor k bina hi release karne ja rahe the
1861, not 1961
Yes bro... Galti se mistake ho gaya.
U caught it.
He wrote that article in 1861 and not in 1961 but mistakenly I said 1961.
Thanks for noticing. 😇
improve your mic please
I know... Voice is not on point, but it will be improved soon. Thanks for feedback. 😇
Boycott Maharaj
मिर्ची इसलिए लगती है भाई साहब लगती है क्योंकि आने वाली बच्चे को पाता चलेगी ऐसे ही पहले हिंदू धर्म में होता था क्या वह हिंदू धर्म को मानेंगे वह हिंदू धर्म से दूर ही जाएंगे या करीब आएंगे😢
Please stop spreading misinformation about Karsandas Mulji. Karsandas Mulji was highly influenced by British Protestant Christianity. His work "Niti Vachan" or Moral training (1859) is full of his ideas of what reform to him meant i.e Christian Protestant ethics, virtues and self-discipline. So, his critique of the Pushtimarg was coming from a Christian perspective rather than from the view point a Hindu reformist saddened by the state of affairs in his religion. Also, the film has removed the character of John Wilson, a scottish christian missionary who was projected by the court as a indologist and a scholar of pushtimarg. During the trial, he made several objectionable remarks on Lord Krishna. Also, the judgement vilifies Krishna specifically and all Krishna Bhakti sampradyas in general by accusing them of being driven by lust and encouraging debauchery. Not to mention that the whole case was based on hearsay incidents narrated by witnesses like Lakshmidas Khimji and Mathuradas Lowjee. In short none of the witnesses actually saw the so called "charanseva". Hence, there were no "criminal charges" pressed against the maharaj, which is claimed in the movie.
Ye relgion hamesha beech mein aa jata h content ka beech mein gangs of wasseypur dialgue. Yaad aata h. Jab tak ye jaati jaati dharam h log pagal banate rahenge
Aur kuch logo ko toh Bollywood se alag hi ghussa hai... Religion ke nam par Nafrat ke pujari apni rotiya senk lete hai.
Please stop spreading misinformation about Karsandas Mulji. Karsandas Mulji was highly influenced by British Protestant Christianity. His work "Niti Vachan" or Moral training (1859) is full of his ideas of what reform to him meant i.e Christian Protestant ethics, virtues and self-discipline. So, his critique of the Pushtimarg was coming from a Christian perspective rather than from the view point a Hindu reformist saddened by the state of affairs in his religion. Also, the film has removed the character of John Wilson, a scottish christian missionary who was projected by the court as a indologist and a scholar of pushtimarg. During the trial, he made several objectionable remarks on Lord Krishna. Also, the judgement vilifies Krishna specifically and all Krishna Bhakti sampradyas in general by accusing them of being driven by lust and encouraging debauchery. Not to mention that the whole case was based on hearsay incidents narrated by witnesses like Lakshmidas Khimji and Mathuradas Lowjee. In short none of the witnesses actually saw the so called "charanseva". Hence, there were no "criminal charges" pressed against the maharaj, which is claimed in the movie.
Saurabh shah ke book padh ke .
Wo aek jain dharam he
Hamare mananiya Grihmantri Amit Shah bhi kabhi khud ko Jain batate hai toh kabhi Hindu.
Gujrat me Jain aur Hindu Baniya kaafi common hai dost.
Toh chahe woh Hindu ho ya Jain.
Unhone khud ek tweet karke ye kaha hai ki woh aur unki Puri family Vaishnav Samaj Ka hissa hai.
Mera video Puri nahi dekhi hogi toh 11.55 minute ke time stamp pe jakar dekh lo dost. Aapko woh screenshot mil jayega jaha Unhone ye kaha hai.
Koi galatfehmi nahi faila Raha hu dost.
Ye wohi Saurabh Shah hai jo Narendra Modi ji ki tarifo ka pool bandhte hai.
Jakar ek bar unka YT channel dekh lo.
Aur Narendra Modi ke bhakt ke hindutva par aap kaise sawal utha skte ho dost.
@@CSR_Moviess Please stop spreading misinformation about Karsandas Mulji. Karsandas Mulji was highly influenced by British Protestant Christianity. His work "Niti Vachan" or Moral training (1859) is full of his ideas of what reform to him meant i.e Christian Protestant ethics, virtues and self-discipline. So, his critique of the Pushtimarg was coming from a Christian perspective rather than from the view point a Hindu reformist saddened by the state of affairs in his religion. Also, the film has removed the character of John Wilson, a scottish christian missionary who was projected by the court as a indologist and a scholar of pushtimarg. During the trial, he made several objectionable remarks on Lord Krishna. Also, the judgement vilifies Krishna specifically and all Krishna Bhakti sampradyas in general by accusing them of being driven by lust and encouraging debauchery. Not to mention that the whole case was based on hearsay incidents narrated by witnesses like Lakshmidas Khimji and Mathuradas Lowjee. In short none of the witnesses actually saw the so called "charanseva". Hence, there were no "criminal charges" pressed against the maharaj, which is claimed in the movie.
Galatfemi mat fela mere dost
Tum kis aadhar par ye bol rha he