Re: Spousal Abuse and Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.
Originally Posted by
devotee
Namaste Baobtree,
There is no mistranslation or error. Actually, when we study scriptures we get blinded with the idea that every word of the scripture must be correct & true irrespective of time & occasion. This expectation is not correct.
The scriptures are not written in a day & there are chances of entry of contamination when they are carried through a period ranging over thousands of years. Brihdaranyaka Upanishad is no exception. There have been some additions/alterations in the original text over a period of time. The part you are referring to is added much later on & is contaminated by social environment at that time. You can easily notice the difference here ... the deep & profound discussion on Advait suddenly changes to "how to get a good son or daughter, how to approach one's wife for sexual intercourse, what to do against paramour of one's wife etc.". This section obviously doesn't match with the earlier major part of Brihdaranyaka Upanishad which discusses Non-duality in depth.
My advice is that please look for the grains & not for the chaff.
OM
Namaste Devotee,
Your view is logical and most plausible. Shankara has clearly marked certain passages,which deal with non-vedic rituals, of Brihadarayanaka as smriti that is reflected in shruti. And this passage pertaining to wooing a female partner is cetainly not a vedic ritual. Yet, it presents a problem or two for us. Either follow Guru/Teacher or check what is Vedic and what is not. For me Guru vakya holds pradhanya.
There is another view. Soma (Prajapati-Brahmanspati, Vachapati) is the primordial husband and Surya the wife. But in common parlance, it is forgotten that the shinier one is actually the product, the daughter. If one forgets this Mastership over Maya, one will suffer like Dasaratha. I am not very sure, since I have not seen any commentary on the passages cited, yet I feel that not everything is illogical in those set of passages of Brihadarayanaka. Why should a wife deny her husband an embrace if the husband first employs normal methods and even gifts her presents?
-------------
But it seems sure that some verses of Brihadaraynaka may be of different genre and being un-vedic may be smriti rather than shruti. This, as per Shankaracharya.
Regards
Om
That which is without letters (parts) is the Fourth, beyond apprehension through ordinary means, the cessation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious and the non-dual. Thus Om is certainly the Self. He who knows thus enters the Self by the Self.
Bookmarks