Love and Marriage

[Believer]

Namaste,

When will people learn that marriage is only for pro-creation and not for love? ;)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18824367

Pranam.

[McKitty]

Vanakkam,

"Yeah so womens got harrassed, let's make forbidden to her communication devices, freedom to go where they want, and put some burka on her ! Oh, also, let's ban happy loving couples from here. It's not funny if they don't cry when we marry them by force!"

Yup, there is no islam invasion. People just act more and more so stupid that they actually look like muslims.

I am sorry but I think this situation id awful. What's next ? Putting all womens into garbage bags and hiding, locking them in closets like in pakistan ?Yes, this will sure resolve all problems, it's well known that a good man id never in fault when assaulting a woman. Just look in middle east what's happening, killing womens and poisoning young girls in their schools...such holy mens!
Sisters from Bharat, rejoice! They will save your souls !

EDIT: TALKING ABOUT HARASSEMENT CASES FEATURED IN ARTICLE, NOT ABOUT MARRIAGE. Sorry


Aum Namah Shivaya

[charitra]

I saw this short documentary yesterday on the methods followed in Kyrzistan to marry off their women. The land is a central asian country sandwiched between Ujbekistan and china. People have mongoloid features and they are all muslims. The women are literally abducted, thrown in a van, taken to the cleric and are married off against their will. Some abductors filmed the said abductions in real time and shared the footage with the documentary producers. Thus we get to have a first hand experience of the ordeal ourselves. We see the women wailing, tossing around to free themselves and trying to run away, a bunch of men hold them, pin them down and literally carry them to marriage hall and a white veil is placed on their heads before the ceremony. The whole experience is shocking, the commentator repeats that it is illegal and against the religion to perform forcible weddings. But then the people and law enforcement look away all the time. World is a tough place to live in I guess.

Of the 6- 8 or so types of vivaahas (weddings) described by the Hindu scholars, the above one is termed as RAKSHASA vivaaha.
By the way, police have arrested the village elders who have passed the diktat. Namaste.

[Believer]

Namaste,

I made the post to show how some old fashioned people in isolated pockets make up some unenforceable rules - something to laugh at. Such people have no backing from the society at large and are normally drummed out of town in no time. I wish the forum members would not take it as a serious piece of news, or as a representative act of the life in Bharat. People, learn to laugh a little at the silliness of kooks in our society!

Pranam.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam B: Where are the silly cooks? I'm in the mood for some silly food.

Regarding marriage, this was also the way in rural Alberta when I grew up. In fact, my own marriage was of this variety. There was no other way. I was far too undisciplined and odd-looking for any serious considerations. My Real and Imaginary brothers all went to town and captured her. But contrary to this story, I believe the two Fathers also exchanged money at the local pool hall, although I'll never know in which direction the money went.

Aum Namasivaya

[Believer]

Namaste EM,

Make that 'kooks'. :)

But contrary to this story, I believe the two Fathers also exchanged money at the local pool hallOur village had not yet caught on with the concept of currency at my marriage, and the deal was made through the exchange of 50 goats and 25 bushels of corn.

Pranam.

[Eastern Mind]

Namaste EM,

Make that 'kooks'. :)

Pranam.

Vannakkam: But if a kooky cook could cook kooky cookies, what kind of kooky cookies would a kooky cook cook?

Aum Namasivaya

[Believer]

Namaste,

The kooky cook would cook kooky cookies with the kooky dough, and they would be just perfect with the afternoon tea for some of us kooky HDF members who are discerning enough to always shop for kooky cook cookies.

Pranam.

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

Just to clarify for the judgemental outsider, "love marriage" here I think refers to those couples who arrange their own marriages after courtship, as opposed to the traditional system in which Hindu parents arranged the marriages of their children based on caste, family compatibility, and examination of the other side's qualifications, etc.

It's easy for Westerners to poke fun or liken it to Islam, but the fact remains that this was the standard marriage custom in human society for centuries and is still practiced even today by modern Hindu families. In the scriptures, we find that most marriages were also arranged in this way. Note that I did say "most." The concept of a "love marriage" is hardly a more enlightened institution, as the nearly 60% divorce rate in the United States should indicate. Not to mention cases of date-rape, partner-abuse, pregnancies out of wedlock which go on almost as an everyday thing.

This class of cultures is the direct result of the invasion of superficial, sense-gratification-oriented, Bollywood-style culture. Real marriages require similarity of values, tolerance, and the support of parents on both sides. These things are not considered by people merely following their hormones and feeling intoxication with their freedom. In the Hindu context, there must be piety and a shared responsibility in the need for performing the obligatory householder sacrifices and other duties. Without this, the gRhastha ashrama degenerates into animal life.

As much as I think their rules will not have the intended benefit, I feel sorry for these village elders who are trying desperately to hang on to their culture. Although it is officially the case that no one should be looked down upon for practicing his culture, it is unfortunately the reality that condescension and scorn of Hindu customs is still socially acceptable even among Hindus themselves. Unfortunate.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam all: The evolution of the marriage system is interesting to watch, at least. I think one that was never there before, but is becoming more and more common, is internet matching. Westerners sick of the dating scene are using it, with some success, too. One son and one daughter of mine found a match that way. With a definite mix of eastern and western values, they didn't really know which way to go. My son, an environmentalist (non-practising-Hindu) vegan part computer geek certainly wasn't having much luck anywhere else. They met on a local vegan chat group, and seem to be a really decent match.

My daughter was just really sick of the dating game, unable to look anywhere to find a suitable match, and every guy seemed to be an immature nutcase. So she went to a matching site, and after some extensive searching, found a non-drinking decent shy guy. She wouldn't have found him any other way.

I am all for arranged marriages, given the cultural circumstances, and the willingness of the potential spouses. I've seen several work out fine among my friends. One of the problems for a couple kids I know was the inability for the parents to get up and get after it ... so it wasn't the kids that were against it, it was the parents unable to do a decent job of it. One son had had enough of the waiting around, so went and found a love marriage, which initially really upset the parents. "Well, Appa, you weren't making an effort, so what was I to do?" The parents have since come around. But I know 2 others in the same circumstance who are now in their mid forties. Too late by many standards.

I'm against sight-unseen forced arranged marriages for economic (read immigration sometimes) reasons. I think it's inhumane, and unethical. All the arranged marriages I know have had the persons involved having final authority to say yes or no.

Love marriages work well too, provided both parties are mature enough to handle the responsibilities that go with it, and this is sometimes a biggie. Immature people should grow up first.

Aum Namasivaya

[McKitty]

I am sorry but I think this situation id awful. What's next ? Putting all womens into garbage bags and hiding, locking them in closets like in pakistan ?Yes, this will sure resolve all problems, it's well known that a good man id never in fault when assaulting a woman. Just look in middle east what's happening, killing womens and poisoning young girls in their schools...such holy mens!
Sisters from Bharat, rejoice! They will save your souls !

EDIT: TALKING ABOUT HARASSEMENT CASES FEATURED IN ARTICLE, NOT ABOUT MARRIAGE. Sorry



Vanakkam,

Seeing this have been misunderstood and that my message wasn't clear anough, I would like to apologize about this and to point out this BIG edit that clearly state I am talking about measures taken regarding harassement and NOT about marriage.

I am not in a country where this is practiced, it's not forbidden, it's simply not (or not anymore) a part of our culture.

Yes, I do agree with Eastern Mind: "selling" mens and womens in marrage is a questionable issue. However, the parents choosing to put their child into marriage for the interest of both sides and for the future family is okay. I don't see problem in this since both sides are responsible adults.

However, in "love" marriage, looking for the right and responsible partner is a very hard path...But still possible.

I didn't knew about the divorce rate in USA, this is incredible Oo But I'm not even surprised, as younger generations become more and more involved into many relationships with many persons without even thinking about it. People marry total strangers because "you live ony once after all!" and "I met him at the bar, we had sex 10 minutes later!", so I'm not impressed about the divorce rate if after they realize they don't belong together or the man beat the woman or the woman beat the man....


My opinion on this is, this is not really a "this way is better than this one" question. A relationship last only if both sides are mature and responsible people. Should they get together by "fate" or by their parents, it's the same. Should the woman be "sold" to a random man, this is not very right I think, and this can end really bad for the woman.


Aum Namah Shivaya

[philosoraptor]

I'm against sight-unseen forced arranged marriages for economic (read immigration sometimes) reasons. I think it's inhumane, and unethical. All the arranged marriages I know have had the persons involved having final authority to say yes or no.


Pranams,

What about the ones you have not seen? Rama was married to Sita, and Sita's three sisters were married to Rama's three brothers. The husbands and wives did not meet or see each other prior to marriage. Would you say their marriages were "inhumane" and "unethical?"

regards,

[Eastern Mind]

Pranams,

What about the ones you have not seen? Rama was married to Sita, and Sita's three sisters were married to Rama's three brothers. The husbands and wives did not meet or see each other prior to marriage. Would you say their marriages were "inhumane" and "unethical?"

regards,

Not at all, but I don't mix scripture with the reality of the day. Even some today, by quite wise elders, I've seen work out just fine. Others ... well, if it weren't for the stigma of divorce, they'd be divorced. These were about 40 years ago. I'm old enough to have seen some evolving of the institution.

Aum Namasivaya

[philosoraptor]

Not at all, but I don't mix scripture with the reality of the day.

Pranams,

I'm not sure what the last clause means here. You said marriages in which boy and girl don't see each other are inhumane and unethical, but failed to apply that standard to the marriage of Rama and Sita. Not only Sita and Rama, but there are many other marriages in our epics which took place the same way. Why aren't they "inhumane" and "unethical?"

Perhaps you may wish to amend alter your original statement. That's all I'm saying.

In previous ages, people had greater fidelity to their duties and religious principles. For parents this meant finding a good match for son/daughter while for son/daughter it meant upholding their duties in a religiously-sanctioned marriage. Gandhaari did not complain that she never knew prior to marriage that Dritharaashtra was blind. Instead, she quietly blindfolded herself to share in her husband's situation.

Viewing of the spouse-to-be did not appear to be a huge issue for ancient Hindus, whereas it is for us today. Frankly, I think this says more about us and our priorities than it does about them, and I think we should all maintain a bit of humility when we consider the ramifications of that.

regards,

[Arjuni]

Namasté,

Just FYI: The "50-60% divorce rate" statistic, often cited with much gasping and tongue-clucking at America, is sensationalist; it grabs headline attention but is also factually wrong. The actual number ranges between 11% and 33%, depending on how the calculation is made.

One who wishes to understand why, may read this analysis (http://digitalcitizen.ca/2009/06/02/50-divorce-rate-is-a-myth-its-more-like-33-or-one-third/) for the simple reason that the calculation done by pop journalism is wrong, and/or this article (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-hughes/what-is-the-real-divorce-_b_785045.html) for the various ways in which the divorce rate of any population may be calculated - all of which provide different totals.

Certainly a 33% number for divorce is still not desirable - and I write that, even while being one of that number - but I do feel that arguments of societal decline, neglect of tradition, and casual disregard for oaths should be based upon a correct assessment of the situation.

Indraneela
===
Oṁ Indrāya Namaḥ.
Oṁ Namaḥ Śivāya.

[Eastern Mind]

Vannakkam phil: I have no intention of getting into some long-winded argument with you, nor anyone else. You obviously know far more about scripture than I do, and I simply have no desire to compete about who knows more about marriage, traditional or otherwise, and how practical life works or doesn't work with a wide variety of scripture. I work from observation and intuition, and our takes will most likely vary. I see no point in all this. I put down some of my observations, and if you want to find contradictions in what I said, all the more power to you. I concede automatically to the greater intellect. With that, I'm out. Best wishes in a successful marriage, if you have one.

Aum Namasivaya

[philosoraptor]

Sounds good.

If there is anyone else who wants to take a crack at the "You Hindus and your marriage customs are inhumane, unethical, unjust, backward, stupid, superstitious," etc argument, let me know.

All I'm looking for is consistency and depth in an argument that holds that my ancestors were bad people for engaging in "no sight beforehand" arranged marriages. It just never occurred to me until now to think of them as inhumane.

As an aside, I'm positively delighted that the divorce rate in the United States may actually be as low as 33%. I admit, I've quoted the 55-60% figure for some time now as I've heard it everywhere without being challenged. But on the other hand, I don't think either statistic takes into account the massive number of love children produced in American inner cities, not infrequently resulting in broken families, often before the child is even born. Though not "marriages," they did start with "love," which I think underscores the inherent social dysfunction in a system where people mate without having first a grounding in genuine spiritual values.

regards,

[Omkara]

Just one point:the village in question was overwhelmingly muslim majority and the sarpanch who made the decision was also a muslim.to correct misconceptions in some of the comments above.

[Mana]

हरिः ओम्


Namaste All,

A fascinating and most important topic. I have never heard a truer word spoken than that:

"The marital state of couples and marriage tradition is a direct reflection of the health of a society"

Given the light of my recent exploration into Jyotish and any analysis of my personal relationships since.

I would put faith in an experienced and accomplished Jyotisha to advise as to the compatibility of my
partner with myself. We do learn to select our selves with time, and love is a very important factor for
those who are attuned to these strong emotional responses. Else children a born out side of a stable
family basis.

The strong response being the very reason that an outside guidance is invaluable in wise selection.

This is obvious to any Jyotisha, the very reason why the 12th house is 6th from the 7th house of marriage.
The problem however may be in finding a Jyotisha with the foresight and liberty of mind, to not become
embroiled with the politics of social dogma, whilst still maintaining dharma.


praṇāma

mana


ॐ नमः शिवाय
Aum Namaḥ Śivāya

[Adhvagat]

Romantic love is a medieval western creation. Romantic love is quite new in the history of the world and of human feelings. It can work quite well and it can be a disaster. I'm sure any type of marriage can fare for better or for worse, it all has to do with the individuals and how much they grow out of that bond.

[charitra]

Romantic love was an old and very much a hindu cultural oncept as much as it was European, a few examples are: Shakuntala and dushyanta (marriage), viswamitra and Menaka (no marriage), Pramila and Arjuna (marriage), Pravarakya and Varudhini (there is an interesting twist in this story) and finally Krishnaand Rukmini (marriage). This makes a strong basis to dismantle varna and caste system altogether. Thanks to the present generations it is already happening.


Romantic love is a medieval western creation. Romantic love is quite new in the history of the world and of human feelings. It can work quite well and it can be a disaster. I'm sure any type of marriage can fare for better or for worse, it all has to do with the individuals and how much they grow out of that bond.

[philosoraptor]

Romantic love was an old and very much a hindu cultural oncept as much as it was European, a few examples are: Shakuntala and dushyanta (marriage), viswamitra and Menaka (no marriage), Pramila and Arjuna (marriage), Pravarakya and Varudhini (there is an interesting twist in this story) and finally Krishnaand Rukmini (marriage). This makes a strong basis to dismantle varna and caste system altogether. Thanks to the present generations it is already happening.


Pranams,

Pietro is correct that the concept of "romantic love" is a new one with origins in the culture of medieval Europe. It originally had the connotation of adulterous love.

The above examples, being used to support a Hindu endorsement of "romantic love," are misleading. Vishvaamitra's association with Menaka was arranged by the devas to break his austerities. In the original context of the Ramayana, this does not have a happy ending and is portrayed quite negatively. The story of Krishna and Rukmini is also misleading because Rukmini and Krishna are an eternal couple, being none other than Narayana and Lakshmi. The eternal devotion of the latter to the former is on a far superior plane than the mundane concept of "romantic love," and this point is alluded to by Sukadeva Rishi in the 10th skandha of the Bhagavata Purana when he discusses the devotion of the gopis to Sri Krishna.

In short, there are certainly examples in Hindu history of marriages formed by spontaneous infatuation rather than traditional arrangement by both sets of parents. This was the gandharva-style of marriage, and it was merely regarded as one type of marriage, certainly not the ideal and definitely not a prescription for the spiritually-inclined.

regards,

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam


-- This makes a strong basis to dismantle varna and caste system altogether. Thanks to the present generations it is already happening.

i suppose Arjun was needlessly worried about Kula Dharma and Varna Shankara.

Also Lord Krishna, i suppose having established the Varna system, (by Birth or Guna or Karma), did not expect the followers, to then carry the tradition of marrying in to the same varna so that there is a continuity of kula tradition.
For those who know horse racing would understand the meaning of thoroughbred pedigree.


off course our priority has changed, sadly the road we are heading does not bode well, no thanks to bollywood, but thankfully, largely in India marriages are still arranged, as long as it is not forced long may it continue.

As the time goes by, our culture gets eroded, free choice, let the kid decide for them selves and in the process we have unwanted progeny so be it, get rid of it or let it be a burden to society. Then what choice do we have?

If we need to introspect, this is what we need to figure out why and what our ancestors did. What is the purpose of life? only then, love and marriages would begin to make sense.

Jai Shree Krishna

[sayak83]

Sounds good.

If there is anyone else who wants to take a crack at the "You Hindus and your marriage customs are inhumane, unethical, unjust, backward, stupid, superstitious," etc argument, let me know.

All I'm looking for is consistency and depth in an argument that holds that my ancestors were bad people for engaging in "no sight beforehand" arranged marriages. It just never occurred to me until now to think of them as inhumane.

As an aside, I'm positively delighted that the divorce rate in the United States may actually be as low as 33%. I admit, I've quoted the 55-60% figure for some time now as I've heard it everywhere without being challenged. But on the other hand, I don't think either statistic takes into account the massive number of love children produced in American inner cities, not infrequently resulting in broken families, often before the child is even born. Though not "marriages," they did start with "love," which I think underscores the inherent social dysfunction in a system where people mate without having first a grounding in genuine spiritual values.

regards,

Some problems exist like Dowry...though that is a social custom rather than a religious one.
I recommend not criticizing practices from other society whose structure is vastly different from those prevalent in India. They can figure out how to deal with these problems themselves using solutions that suit that environment.
There is a lot of spousal abuse in our society as well that we should concentrate of eradicating. Many great Hindu thinkers of the last century were also great social reformers and we would be letting this legacy down if we try to de-emphasize many problems that exists in our family and society today.
I have no reason to claim ancient marriage practices were unethical, but today arranged marraige without seeing your spouse beforehand will be. This is no different from the case where once Kings were the ideal form of governments, today democracy is.

[philosoraptor]

Some problems exist like Dowry...though that is a social custom rather than a religious one.
I recommend not criticizing practices from other society whose structure is vastly different from those prevalent in India. They can figure out how to deal with these problems themselves using solutions that suit that environment.
There is a lot of spousal abuse in our society as well that we should concentrate of eradicating. Many great Hindu thinkers of the last century were also great social reformers and we would be letting this legacy down if we try to de-emphasize many problems that exists in our family and society today.

Pranams,

Dowry as such is not a problem per se. The practice of gifting the couple with a dowry was present in many cultures and (in ancient Vedic culture at least) reflected the love and good wishes of the parents towards the daughter and son-in-law.

The problem occurs due to irreligious behavior of some men in modern times who try to take advantage of the woman for the sake of the dowry. Taking away dowry will not change the corruption in these people. They will merely find other ways to enrich themselves at others' expense. Once again, the theme here is the degeneration of spiritual values as the real cause of India's problems, and not the specific customs.

[sayak83]

Pranams,

Dowry as such is not a problem per se. The practice of gifting the couple with a dowry was present in many cultures and (in ancient Vedic culture at least) reflected the love and good wishes of the parents towards the daughter and son-in-law.

The problem occurs due to irreligious behavior of some men in modern times who try to take advantage of the woman for the sake of the dowry. Taking away dowry will not change the corruption in these people. They will merely find other ways to enrich themselves at others' expense. Once again, the theme here is the degeneration of spiritual values as the real cause of India's problems, and not the specific customs.

Dowry is by definition the coercive request for gifts and money as precondition for marraige. banning dowry practise means banning this practice, not the free practice of gifts.

[philosoraptor]

Dowry is by definition the coercive request for gifts and money as precondition for marraige. banning dowry practise means banning this practice, not the free practice of gifts.

No it is not.

There are many examples in the itihAsa/purANa of dowry being given voluntarily in marriage without coercion. The idea of coercive dowry seems to be more of a modern phenomenon.

[sayak83]

No it is not.

There are many examples in the itihAsa/purANa of dowry being given voluntarily in marriage without coercion. The idea of coercive dowry seems to be more of a modern phenomenon.

Anything non-coercive is always acceptable. I was talking more about the legal defn of dowry in Indian laws that prohibit dowry. There coercive demands only are considered dowry.

[Omkara]

Small correction-They prohibit forced payment of dowry,which is why your definition is wrong.