Love and Marriage

[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.

[quote=Pietro Impagliazzo;88324]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.[/quote]

[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.