We are a bunch of hypocrites. We say that women must be given equal rights and equal opportunities in every sphere because after all females constitute 50% of the world population. And there are women in power in almost every sphere of society. The ancient texts refer to a wife being an ardhangini (better half). But does this discount the fact that we still are very much a male chauvinist society?
I was appalled to read a statement made by learned judges of the Bombay High court wherein while hearing a divorce petition, the judge remarked that "A wife should be like goddess Sita who left everything and followed her husband Lord Ram to a forest and stayed there for 14 years,". While it is not unorthodox for judges to refer to religious texts and quote from them, it was rather surprising to see this coming from a judiciary that is considered to be one of the most progressive in the country.
A bare reading of the Hindu epics, i.e., the Ramayana and the Mahabharata suggests that a woman was to be treated as her husband's property. Infact, this was still the case till the 19th century in most parts of the world. Hindu women in India have very recently been given equal rights with respect to their father's property but a Hindu woman can still not be considered a coparcener with rights to inherit the coparcenary property.
The epics suggest that Ramayana should be considered to be the ideal way of life. The protagonist, Ram is referred to as Maryada Purushottam (the ideal man). Does idealism suggest that a man should question his wife's virtue and subject her to agnipariksha to prove that she is 'pure'. Should a man who banishes his pregnant wife be considered an ideal husband? And a wife who accepts her husband inspite of such atrocities be a woman of virtue? I think not.
Similarly, the Mahabharata is rife with examples of subjugation of women. A woman gets married to one man but is 'shared' by his brothers. She is then commodified and placed as a bet in a game of dice. There are attempts made to strip her in an open court but there is nobody who comes to her rescue. The only one who saves her from this humiliation is Lord Krishna who himself has been described as a Casanova married to several women. Is this the kind of society we envisage? Rather, doesn't such a mentality already exist in the light of the numerous incidents that we read every other day? A virtuous wife is one who will blindfold herself for life just because her husband is blind. It is rather unfortunate that such notions are considered to be the ideal way of life.
In a nation that is plagued with crimes against women and where even the judiciary considers subjugation of women to be a way of life, female emancipation means little. So the next time a case of incest comes up, will the Honourable Court suggest that a wife should be like Draupadi?
While commenting & I quote- "Should a man who banishes his pregnant wife be considered an ideal husband?", it must be kept in mind that Lord Ram was a King for whom the priority must be the welfare of his subjects. & if you delve into the story further, it has been clearly stated that 'the subjects' were doubtful about the virtue & 'purity' of Goddess Sita.While it is unacceptable for a woman in today's era, the fact that earlier it was of utmost importance to place the subjects above even the family, accounts for the sacrificial nature of the King & his sincerity, cannot be ignored.
ReplyDeleteAn article well written, on a subject that will always be a matter of debate.
Thanks for your feedback! As you pointed out it is definitely a debatable issue. However, I think that a commitment made to one's spouse should be equal, if not higher to the commitment made to one's subjects. Was Rama scared of the fact that if he doesn't pay heed to his subjects' demands, they wouldn't accept him as their king, which is why he chose to sacrifice the commitment that he had made to his wife? He might have been an ideal king but somehow I am not convinced about his portrayal as the ideal husband.
DeleteI couldn't resist myself from commenting on this one. Sadly, this article is imbued with clichéd rhetoric, with a very shallow understanding of the epics, society and philosophy. Having said this, I don't really sponsor what Shri Ram did. As a suggestion, dive deeper into Mahabharat, understand the "Casanova" part in Lord Krishna.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I'm not from the saffron brigade. Nor do I oppose equal opportunity. (Diff. from equality.)
At the outset I must admit that I have only read abridged versions of epics. And yes, though there isn't much new perspective in the post, the idea was to express dissent towards the remarks made by judges of the Bombay High Court. The epics and society at large is undeniably rampant with incidents of misogyny. I agree that most consorts of Krishna were women who he had saved at some point or the other and that is probably how primitive societies worked but today's such analogies are quite irrelevant in today's times. Then again the concept of God and Demon is another debate.
ReplyDeleteWhile I reckon the Mahabharata to be one of the most brilliant works on science fiction, I'd hope that the judiciary refrains from paying tributes to epics in their remarks.
P.S. I'm not a feminist.
If your understanding of the Indian philosophy, which includes Krishna- the human, is superficial, then your remarks/thoughts/whateva shall remain lip-service.
ReplyDeleteBlogosphere is rampant with blogposts like these which talk about a person's super-farce rather than some deep insight or thought. If you ignore something (Science fiction?! Huh), it doesn't mean, the reality isn't there. Anyway.. Try becoming the ocean and not a leaf, floating with a wave.
Which is why this is a blogpost and not an article. I do not claim to be any authority on religion etc. I have just put forth my viewpoint which everybody is free to counter.
DeleteAnd come on, science fiction or reality are debatable just the way belief in God and atheism is.Why deny me of that liberty?
I think feminists are making the society a complete chaos . Basically what they want is demolish the marriage system and make peoples live like animals life , where they will dictate the society by illogical laws . I think their main goal is to make every woman as prostitutes to make money . Hey , it's been extremely clear that not a single lady wants to be wife , they want to be husband .
ReplyDeleteWhat's wrong with the statement if high court judges want women to be SITA while all the laws has been made to protect women imagining of women as sita.
Can you guys stop bulshiting around that the women are powerful than men . Because not a single logic stand for it . Basically stop pampering nonsense , because the way women are wrongly trying to dominate the society in the help of illogical laws , the day will come soon when not a single women will be safe , because they are simply making men as their enemy . Rape will be increased , and crime against women will become the ultimate satisfaction and honor of a man . Because that will be a pleasure for a man to justify his pain and unjustified feelings for a woman .Yeah you guys will be dragging the example of USA . But do you know there are 3500 peoples are waiting for death in American prisons , and 85% of them is the product of liberal woman who has treated man as a satisfaction of sexual desire , more over that the contest of superiority become that much high in USA , as a result same sex marriage is being considered , which psychologically extremely abnormal . I have no idea why these kicked out women and single women are being praised who does not have any respect to opposite sex and men to go against woman . Women are superior than man in philosophy not in practical.
Is it too difficult to be friendly and loving to opposite sex , because that's way society has been developed , that's the way religions has been made , and i don't think those peoples like Nabi Muhammad , Jesus Christ , or our ancestors were stupid or bunch jokers .
Exactly the chauvinism I was talking about.
DeleteMost illogical post ever. As someone who has actually lived in the West, Manas' fear mongering is so silly that it is hilarious. Agree with you Tanvi, and saddened that India still has such a long way to go.
DeleteWow! 513 words to be exact...yes you absorbed the whole of Ramayan and Mahabharat, I wonder what took Tulsidas & Ved Vyaas years in writing these if the soul of the duo can be written in just one A4 size paper. And, at the same time beautifully presenting couple of challenges to Indian legal system (yes, that again in just one A4 size paper)… 1-Section 295A of the IPC (acts intended to outrage religious feelings or any class by insulting people's religion or religious beliefs) 2-The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
ReplyDeleteBizarrely fascinating!
You may not wonder but I also received updates from couple of lovely ladies in Mumbai (with Dragon tattoo on their back) on the same judgment saying Indian women are ‘abused’ by court to follow Sita. Yes, things are leading in the right direction :), aren’t they? (I know, you’ll probably not endorse their thoughts)
Having said this, I wonder why so ‘loud’ fuss on a court suggestion? (It was just a suggestion, not a judgement to follow). The court only said: “A wife should be like goddess Sita who left everything and followed her husband Lord Ram to a forest and stayed there for 14 years”…. That’s it (full stop). And, see people have swallowed the whole of Ramayana. The intention of court was very clear, and that was to unite a couple...again, that’s it! Judges didn’t abuse anyone. Did they? (Court probably had no better example) Or rather, they should have asked to follow Madonna who still didn’t find her soul-mate even after tying several knots after separations, one after other. Or may be, Sylvia Plath who many believed committed suicide out of loneliness.
I appreciate your confession that you only have a ‘bare reading of the Hindu epics’, and you probably don’t even understand them (neither do I). So, if you do not understand them, please do not elaborate them. I know couple of Geeta Press stalls where you can buy those epics and understand them in deep, rather saying ‘the epic suggest…’ :)
Keep it sweet and simple, and take the court’s suggestion in good spirits that unites the people we love, believes in united family and encourages people to stay together….
And see, how much enjoyed your read and wrote almost similar length as in your blog post. To sum up, I do believe equal opportunity for men & women and I have read this blog with deepest regards to the women and to all lovely ladies around whom we have been raised up, with an intention to respect everyone.
And Tanvi, you write wonderfully. Just avoid breaking Indian laws as I suggested in fisrt para :). Good luck!
As a law student at the time of writing this blog post, I am sure Tanvi is better aware of the law than you.
DeleteThe reason for the fuss: Sita is a religious figure who may have existed thousands of years ago. That we expect women today to emulate her example is unfair. Even Ram accepted that he did wrong by Sita -- he never remarried, even though he was unaware of the existance of any heir. We celebrate Ram and Sita for their sacrifices; expecting these sacrifices as a matter of course is undermining the very extraordinary nature of them.
Further, should a woman emulate Madonna, she is free to do so. In the same way, should a man wish to emulate Sylvester Stallone, he is free to do so. Should either of their spouses have a problem with them, they can take it up themselves. As long as they are not harming people with their conduct, they have every right to expression.
Great women come in all sizes and colours. They can be like Sita, they can be like Durga, they can be like Kali, they can even be like Madonna (her success and her achievements do make her greater than me or you). It is not for a court to decide the ideal qualities of a man or woman, bit to interpret conduct on the basis of law.
P.S. the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan's version of the epics are more detailed and (much) more scholarly than Gita Press's. I have read both. The former admittedly is more expensive.