The Wife is the Guru and the Deity of the Husband

[Believer]

Namaste,

Yes, I agree that if we put 10 different Hindus in the room, we are likely to get 10 different perspectives. However, this problem would be minimized if all 10 Hindus observed the following, simple, and easy-to-follow points of etiquette and intellectual honesty:

The only person you can control is yourself.

The culture on these Hinduism forums of every Tom, Dick, and Harry.......

That is a gender biased statement. It should be 'every Tom, Dick, Kathy and Sally'. Equal representation please!

They are not going to take what you say as the authoritative words.

That about sums it up.
The general attitude is, 'I may not know what is in the scriptures, but I don't accept your words either'. Unless somebody wants to receive, there is no point of others being ready to give!

Pranam.

[Viraja]

Oh, I just wanted to add one thing to you, Philosoraptor -

You are extremely well read and that is obvious from your posts.

(Since I did not add it at my earlier post, I want to make another post to mention this so you don't miss what I say). I don't want Ma Saraswati or Shri Yoga Hayagriva to be angry at me for not giving due respect to a lot of hardwork!

Cheers!

[philosoraptor]

Someone who does not want to "receive" knowledge from scripture, should not insert one's self into a thread where discussion of scripture is taking place, and start off one's response with "I don't care for scripture, here is my opinion...." And someone who wants to elevate the standards of discussion should not become an apologist for such behavior, and then ask for those who provide meaningful contributions to cease doing so on the grounds that their contributions are educating people, and too much education makes people uncomfortable.

I submit that if "put up or shut up" is going to be the new operating credo, then those who preach it should also follow it when more egregious examples of anti-Hindu defamation are taking place.

We live in a reality where hatred of Hinduism is socially acceptable, even among Indian Hindus themselves. We've seen Western converts into "Hinduism" call our culture "vile" and other persons identifying themselves as Hindus denouncing our shAstras as irrelevant. All cultures should be respected, these people preach, except for cultures like Hinduism, which are always the exception to the rule. These things are not going to go away. With time, they will only get worse. It would be extremely regressive to be asked not to address the kinds of socially misunderstood issues within Hinduism that are a focus for the critics' malcontent. If it is unacceptable to discuss vaidika culture as it is on a Hinduism forum, with a reasonable expectation of not being attacked for it, then where is that forum where one can discuss these things?

I don't post with the intention of soliciting agreement with any specific point of view. The point of these postings is to enlighten and educate. I only ask that if you are uncomfortable with the point of view of shAstra that I express here, then do as I have done: invest the time and do your own reading. You will be a better person for challenging your assumptions than being complacent with them. And the forum will be better for it, if we could discuss the literature on the basis of what is actually found in the literature, instead of personal intuition or popular opinion.

[Sudas Paijavana]

delete

[JaiMaaDurga]

विद्या ब्रह्मणमेत्याह शेवधिस्तेऽस्मि रक्ष मां । असूयकाय मां मा दास्तथा स्यां वीर्यवत्तमा॥
यमेव तु शुचिं विद्या नियतब्रह्मचारिणं
तस्मै मां ब्रूहि विप्राय निधिपाय अप्रमादिने ॥

JAI MATA DI

[smaranam]

Dear Eriko,

I do hear what you have to say. I have some good news for you regarding Hindu Sanatan Dharma ShAstra.

Husband is not God, and will not be. It is ignorant for anybody to feel otherwise. Respecting your husband is not treating him as God.

What the shAstra tells us, as a "rule [of thumb]" is really wisdom of the sages inspired by that Lotus Eyed Shri Hari Himself, and was the way of the Arya. That leads to definition of Arya - noble.
Both wisdom and common sense pervade our shAstra.
Along with these rules of thumb (for living and existence with a higher taste) there is always a catch.

In this case also, there is a catch. What is it?
"The chaste woman should treat her husband as God (i.e. as a representative of God) provided the husband is not fallen." - Thisis paraphrased from Shrimad BhAgvat MahApurAN 7.11.28 as we shall see in detail soon. Please see all scriptural refs below.

Marriage is about mutual love and respect.

Hindu Sanatan Dharma agrees.
In fact, Hindu Dharma has the greatest respect for the womankind. The Arya civilization of the ancient past, has been very respectful to women. Just look at Shri KRshNa - how He put all His 8 wives on pedestals, pampered them, fought with Indra to get the parijat tree for His SatyabhAmA. You may say - well, KRshNa IS God, yes, but He set an example.

such misplaced notions of so called religious people like you contribute to the exploitation of women in real world. Why there is so much domestic violence and little love and affection for women? Because men, because of what you people say, expect their wives to treat them as Gods when they are not so Godly themselves.

Yes, I agree with you. This has happened and continues to happen - especially when a simple submissive wife has a surrendering spirit towards her husband but is way too naive to see through the cracks and loophopes. Then it is too late. Therefore, the shAstra says "but there is a catch"
At the same time, this does not always happen to the submissive but innocent wives. Sometimes it is the rebellious ones that are matched with an equally rebellious male and things go downward. This is kArmic.

You might think of them as God because you love them, and not because they are your parents, or your husband or whatever.

And that IS the whole idea of the scriptures. Please see the Sage Yajnavalka reference (BRhadAranyaka Upanishad) in post 2 or 4 or so on this thread. "The wife loves the husband, not for the sake of the husband but for the sake of the sacchidAnanda AtmA (Self) [in him]"
Why? Because that is the same AtmA as you! So you are doing yourself a favour by loving another being for the sake of the Self. Haribol!

----
Regarding Philosoraptor, we know him here on HDF for a while now, and he is not all what you are thinking. Please see post#5 and #7 on this thread, he has some very nice things to say about the Hindu wife. He is thorough and honest and hence expects the same from others. Studying, following and imparting shAstra is a tapasyA. The intention is noble - to make Hindus aware of their shAstric wisdom so as to raise the degraded standard of Hindu culture closer to the Arya standards.

ShAstra references and purports in next post. continued...

[smaranam]

In this case also, there is a catch. What is it?
"The chaste woman should treat her husband as God (i.e. as a representative of God) provided the husband is not fallen." - Thisis paraphrased from Shrimad BhAgvat MahApurAN 7.11.28

SB 7.11.25: To render service to the husband, to be always favorably disposed toward the husband, to be equally well disposed toward the husband's relatives and friends, and to follow the vows of the husband — these are the four principles to be followed by women described as chaste.

SB 7.11.26-27: A chaste woman must dress nicely and decorate herself with golden ornaments for the pleasure of her husband. Always wearing clean and attractive garments, she should sweep and clean the household with water and other liquids so that the entire house is always pure and clean. She should collect the household paraphernalia and keep the house always aromatic with incense and flowers and must be ready to execute the desires of her husband. Being modest and truthful, controlling her senses, and speaking in sweet words, a chaste woman should engage in the service of her husband with love, according to time and circumstances.

SB 7.11.28: A chaste woman should not be greedy, but satisfied in all circumstances. She must be very expert in handling household affairs and should be fully conversant with religious principles. She should speak pleasingly and truthfully and should be very careful and always clean and pure. Thus a chaste woman should engage with affection in the service of a husband who is not fallen.

Purport to SB7.11.28 by A.C. BhaktivedAnta Swami PrabhupAd:

...Thus a chaste woman is advised not to agree to serve such a husband. It is not that a chaste woman should be like a slave while her husband is narādhama, the lowest of men. Although the duties of a woman are different from those of a man, a chaste woman is not meant to serve a fallen husband. If her husband is fallen, it is recommended that she give up his association. Giving up the association of her husband does not mean, however, that a woman should marry again ... If a chaste woman unfortunately marries a husband who is fallen, she should live separately from him. Similarly, a husband can separate himself from a woman who is not chaste according to the description of the śāstra. The conclusion is that a husband should be a pure Vaiṣṇava and that a woman should be a chaste wife with all the symptoms described in this regard. Then both of them will be happy and make spiritual progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

(Notes: Definition of narAdham may vary, and is not meant to be subjective, but if the husband has addictions, adharmic tendencies, raises temper due to them and beats wife, is extremely unreasonable, and unreasonably suspicious or jealous, has a psychopathic past... you get the idea.
The wife may at first try to be supportive and understanding and not provoke the temper, but then seperate for the sake of children, to avoid the violence for the better good of all involved, etc.)

SB 7.11.29: The woman who engages in the service of her husband, following strictly in the footsteps of the goddess of fortune, surely returns home, back to Godhead, with her devotee husband, and lives very happily in the Vaikuṇṭha planets.

SB 6.18.33-34: A husband is the supreme demigod (devatA) for a woman. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Vāsudeva, the husband of the goddess of fortune, is situated in everyone's heart and is worshiped through the various names and forms of the demigods by fruitive workers. Similarly, a husband represents the Lord as the object of worship for a woman.
Purport on this verse by Swami PRabhupAd (A.C. BhaktivedAnta) - I know Orlando linked to it earlier here.

One who is not in direct touch with the Supreme Lord and cannot conceive of the exalted position of the Lord is sometimes advised to worship the demigods as various parts of the Lord. If women, who are usually very much attached to their husbands, worship their husbands as representatives of Vāsudeva, the women benefit, just as Ajāmila benefited by calling for Nārāyaṇa, his son...
In India a husband is still called pati-guru, the husband spiritual master. If husband and wife are attached to one another for advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, their relationship of cooperation is very effective for such advancement. Although the names of Indra and Agni are sometimes uttered in the Vedic mantras (indrāyasvāhā, agnayesvāhā), the Vedic sacrifices are actually performed for the satisfaction of Lord Viṣṇu. As long as one is very much attached to material sense gratification, the worship of the demigods or the worship of one's husband is recommended.

(Notes: See the underlined in purport above - it is meant for those in the material world, to channel their life in a godly/divine way. While the husband performs the yajna-puja the wife simply holds his arm and says "mama AtmanAm..." Since her department of specialization is different. In fact, wife can reach God easily in her own way, she does not need to "drive" the yajna. Some ego lesson, eh?)

-----------
* Eriko, I agree that this is not the ONLY mArga (way) for women to get moksha, as long as Shri KRshNa says:
Bhagvad Gita 9.32:
māḿ hi pārtha vyapāśritya
ye 'pi syuḥ pāpa-yonayaḥ
striyo vaiśyās tathā śūdrās
te 'pi yānti parāḿ gatim
O son of Pṛthā, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth, women, vaiśyas [merchants] and śūdras [workers], can attain the supreme destination (param gatim).
(next verse He says - what to speak of bramhins).

Implying, anyone and everyone can reach Me if properly surrendered and devoted to Me, irrespective of varNa caste creed race sex.

So, the conclusion is, if you are married, it is wiser to follow the wisdom in shAstra for the good of all i.e. start on the "right foot."
The wife may be a devotee of Shri Hari, but that does not mean she cannot also be a good wife to the husband. If the wife is not spiritual at all, but totally immersed in the material, then regarding husband (actually each other) as representative of God will help both in the long run. No ego struggles, but awareness.

_/\_
om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

In an attempt to get back the original point of this thread, which may be almost forgotten considering the multiple unwelcome digressions, I wanted to point out a few things.

Mirabhai, a great devotee of Lord Krishna, was famously alleged to have remarked that, before Sri Krishna, we (men and women) are all women. I fully admit that this is legend, for which I have no definite proof, but it is commonly said about her (although disputed by Gaudiyas, but that is another matter).

Sri Prabhupada, in his book Nectar of Devotion, quotes a verse from the padma purANa in which various sages of Dandakaranya forest petition Lord Raama to grant them the boon of becoming His wives in their next birth. Lord Raama remarks that in this present avatAra, He practices eka-patni vrata, and instead, gives the sages the boon of becoming gopikas during the time of His descent as Sri Krishna.

There are other examples of superior standards of bhakti being demonstrated by women in shAstra.

These include the gopikas of Vrindaavan, who received Uddhava as a messenger, the latter intent on teaching them about yoga and sense-control, only to walk away humbled at the simple, pure bhakti of the young cowherd girls of Vraja.

And then there were the yagna-patnis of Vrindaavan, who gladly served Sri Krishna while their less intelligent brahmin husbands declined to do so in favor of their karma-kanda sacrifice.

And, who can forget the statement in the Adi skandha, about how Sri Krishna appreciated more the prayers of the women of Dvaaraka over the Vedic chanting of the brahmins?

I am confused about this. Since the official, politically-correct, academic position, so thoroughly imbibed by our younger generation, is that Hinduism is a misogynistic religion in which we subordinate women to men and heap all sorts of abuses and restrictions on them, how did classical Hinduism come to extol these expressions of uttama-bhakti that are characteristically and indisputably feminine?

Does this have anything to do with the points I was making in the very first posting of this thread?

[redifflal]

Misinformed people are touchy about the "husband is a God to wife" subject because of the abuse the aforementioned philosophy has generated in terms of misogyny. The concept is actually very noble and symbolic, because in approach to God one must do it unconditionally. Likewise in love to a husband, the wife must do it unconditionally.

Let us be clear here, there is also "atithi devo bhava" or "Guest is God" which means that even when you enter the house of a poor farmer in rural India as his guest, he will not let you feel the poverty even if his family goes starving that night. However, atithi devo bhava does not and has not had the reputation of being abused to the point of a cultural wrong in the form of widespread misogyny in contemporary Indian traditional culture.

And while we are on point, it is also important to note that the husband is also to love his wife in Devi-roop. Just as unconditional is the love of wife to husband, the love for wife is also ideally unconditional. This is where happiness for both husband and wife derives from on the material, emotional and spiritual planes. Take advantage of a chaste wife's worship for you while you see yourself as a superior in a union of equal souls, and you will most definitely not be anywhere close to moksha.