There has been lot of talks about "women independence" and "freedom". I have seen many messages where it is mentioned that in India "Women is not independent and freedom is not granted ". In the current scenerio, I have also seen that in many cases the words "independence" and "freedom" is taken for granted esp by the women.
I am confused to some extent on this. Below are some factors that I have taken to understand the level of independence and freedom required for a women :
<b>a. EQUALITY IN GOOD THINGS:</b>
I am really happy on women claiming "equality" in good things. This effectively includes career, education etc.
My sincere wishes and prayers for them in achieving this. They should be given full "freedom" and "indepedence" in achieving this.
<b>b. FAMILY LIFE:</b>
In India, the success rates of families are much higher compared with western countries during the past. One of the major reasons for this could be the traditional values that we impose on the society especially on the women. To some extent, the women is submissive to a man. I feel this is required. There should be one "head" in the family. I feel, that should be the husband. The husband should take care of his wife in all the aspects. This is clearly mentioned in all the religions, be it bible (or) Quran (or) Gita. The scripture clearly tells that the "Husband" should be respected by a wife like what she does to the GOD. No where it is mentioned that husband should respect wife like GOD but it is mentioned that husband should love wife.
In a family, there may be give and take scenerios. Husband and wife cannot work independently if we need a successful family life. The freedom needs to be restricted inline with the traditional values of the nation. But, now-a-days, I see, women are claiming that they are also equal to men and creating problems in the family.
If you see the trends of failing families in India, within a decade, you can see the divorce rates of India equalling the western countries.
Do we need this situation in India ?
<b>c. EQUALITY IN BAD THINGS:</b>
In India, we have imposed restrictions on women for "smoking" and "drinking". They are not allowed to move around freely and controlled. I feel this control is required. I do not think, a true Indian lover, wish to "smoke" and "drink" with his wife and children ! These areas, I feel, women needs to be controlled.
Also, the controls imposed on a girl to move around freely, will reduce the probability of having improper sexual relationships. In India, we rarely see young women getting pregnant in a illegal way. But this is common in the western countries. Because of the open culture of the westerners, the society is affected with harmful diseases, teenage mothers and careless children.
Do we need this situation in India ??
<b>d. SOCIAL STATUS:</b>
The social status of women covers dressing styles, behavior in a social gathering.
While a women claims equality in everything with men, why she does not claim the same in wearing dresses ?? Even in the western countries, men dress well, but very rarely you can see a properly dressed women. Women finds pleasure in exposing secret parts of her body !! But most of the religions clearly mentions that the "body of the women can only be seen by her husband" . Why the girls not able to follow this ? Is there any bottleneck for them to achieve this ? Is it because there is no adequate communication made to the women to show them how foolish and low they look when they do not dress adequately ??? Is it because of the corruption by the media ( TV/Magazines/Internet etc) ? This needs immediate attention.
In western countries, they have a habit of shaking hands, dancing with other wife and dating with others wife. In India, we have a wonderful word "nameste" for greeting ? Infact, we can also use the good words available in English for greeting . Why there is an issue in using this words to greet others ? Should we follow the act of prostitutes ( touching people of other gender ) to show our greeting. This is obviously not required.
<b>CONCLUSION:</b>
While I am saying all these, definitely, I am against all the other evil acts ( dowry, cruelty etc ) done against our women. This needs to be taken care with high priority.
The western countries are suffering with "Moral degenerosity" because of the "open" culture that they have . Indian culture respects family and traditions and it is successful over the years except few areas like dowry, cruelty against women which needs to attended and eradicated.
Given the above, Should we develop a culture of providing a "full independence to a women" in India (or) is it advisable to cultivate the conservative culture as per the Indian tradition ?
Pls provide your thoughts. Thanks in advance for all your replies.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--> To some extent, the women is submissive to a man. I feel this is required. There should be one head in the family<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not share responsibility? Why we need a dictator to run home? Democracy is best solution.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->If you see the trends of failing families in India, within a decade, you can see the divorce rates of India equalling the western countries<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why to blame women? One can't clap with one hand.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->But, now-a-days, I see, women are claiming that they are also equal to men and creating problems in the family. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why to blame women? It seems men are not ready to adjust and are least flexible.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, the controls imposed on a girl to move around freely, will reduce the probability of having improper sexual relationships<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why not put control on men?
Thanks for your response. I am happy to answer your queries with my best possible efforts.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why not share responsibility? Why we need a dictator to run home? Democracy is best solution.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pls note, Whatever I am mentioning here has nothing to do with the sharing of responsibility. That by default needs to be done. Dictatorship is also not what I am talking about. Democracy is also acceptable. To what extent in a family life is the question ?
For all those who follow religious traits meticulously, all of them states that "Husband" is the head of the family and he should "love" his wife as he loves his own self.
The point I am trying to communicate is that with all these love and understanding that we are talking about, the husband should be the head of the family and he needs to take the final call wherever there are differences. Otherwise it ends up in no manâs land paving way for more and more problems only.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Raja :If you see the trends of failing families in India, within a decade, you can see the divorce rates of India equalling the western countries
Mudy: Why to blame women? One can't clap with one hand.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, To some extend, my previous clarification answer this question. Let us understand the statistics. Let us ignore the families failing due to cruelty, dowry etc. I am considering these as illegal act and the parties involved needs to be punished.
For others, the main reasons for failures are the ones listed below:
1. Lack of communication
2. Lack of understanding
3. Independent decisions and non-compromised arguments
Lack of communication and understanding is definitely the bigger topic which needs to be addressed separately. The point no :3, is the one relevant to this discussion. Here they end-up in decisions and arguments where there is no end. Finally each one them takes a call on their own including the family life. Ofcourse,one may argue that once communication and understanding improves, these things will be automatically taken care, but in reality this is not so easy. We true followers of religion, over the decades we have set up an culture where âhusbandâ is the head of the family and he will take the final call on these kind of issues. I am stressing the point too much here as once these culture is cultivated again in India, there will be a great improvement in the success rates of families.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Raja: Also, the controls imposed on a girl to move around freely, will reduce the probability of having improper sexual relationships
Mudy:Why not put control on men?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again, control needs to be put on men also. But, pls understand, the point here. Who is the one who is getting affected to the most ? For men, it may be an activity. For women, there are lot of post-consequences. Therefore, the control needs to be more on women. In USA, one out of three women is sexually abused. 75% of the school girls are sexually abused. Many girls becoming pregnant when they are studying in schools ? Do we need a culture where our 15 year kid comes back to us and say that she is pregnant ? Pls think about it.
Our culture and dressing styles are getting corrupted by the westerners. In the process, they also force "Equalism concept" which leads the nation to get "morally corrupt" like the westerners.
Thanks for your reply. Expect your further contributions on this.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"Equalism concept" which leads the nation to get "morally corrupt" like the westerners.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hindu society, pre Mullah Rule in India always believed in so called "Equal right concept". It is Mullah/Muslim occupation in India ruined Hindu/Indian culture and dragged India into medieval Arabia culture. I still don't understand why such a fixation towards medieval Arabia culture which till now believes in subjugation of women and other religion and still fascinates some Indian men who call themselves educated.
Reasons for "morally corrupt" society lies somewhere else, it is a rush for materialist life and staying away from religious teaching.
It is not a question of Man or woman; it is a question of how to treat other human. Every human should give respect to other human with equal eyes.
[Admin : Don't refer members with Dear]<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Hindu society, pre Mullah Rule in India always believed in so called "Equal right concept". It is Mullah/Muslim occupation in India ruined Hindu/Indian culture and dragged India into medieval Arabia culture. I still don't understand why such a fixation towards medieval Arabia culture which till now believes in subjugation of women and other religion and still fascinates some Indian men who call themselves educated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can u please explain. It is foolish to bring "education" into this. To the best of my knowledge, even in our hindu culture, we have lot of restrictions on women.
Pls explain what you call "Equal right concept". Pls read my initial message. My question is "Equal rights in what" ?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Reasons for "morally corrupt" society lies somewhere else, it is a rush for materialist life and staying away from religious teaching.
It is not a question of Man or woman; it is a question of how to treat other human. Every human should give respect to other human with equal eyes.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pls explain this. What is religious teaching ? Let us take Hindu, Christian and muslim religions. Does the religions talk about men and women living independently ? I am totally sure all of these religions talk about certain restrictions on the women ! Ofcourse, GOD himself differentiated men and women with different body structures.
It is very generic to say "humans" but we need to be specific when we see serious issues like "moral degenorosity" and failures in "family life"
Let us not talk theory. Let us answer practically to these questions. Why almost 60-70% of the marriages fail in the western countries ? Why one out of 3 women in western countries morally abused ? Why still it is not happening in India ? Why women walk without proper dresses to cover their body in the western countries ( In another message posted , it was mentioned that this culture is now spoiling india also. It was mentioned in that message that the girls feel it is the style to show their panties outside and what not ! ) ? Is it because of the lack of adequate communication to them on how low and crazy they look like when they wear such dresses ? Why one out of four school girls sexually abused in western countries and become pregnant ? Do you not think it is the over-independence and freedom imposed on these women ? If not, why it is not happening in conservative countries like india ?
"Equalism", "Democracy" and "Independence" are very interesting topics and I am not talking against it. But what you should understand is the "extent" of the same to be provided ! NO ONE IN THE WORLD IS INDEPENDENT TO DO WHATEVER HE WANTS !
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Can u please explain. It is foolish to bring "education" into this. To the best of my knowledge, even in our hindu culture, we have lot of restrictions on women<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
After medieval Arabia occupation of India, forced Indian women inside walls.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why women walk without proper dresses to cover their body in the western countries<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Have you ever visited old temples? Did they covered Indian women? Have you been to Ellora and Ajanta?
Why not lock men?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why almost 60-70% of the marriages fail in the western countries ?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In India same number get abused within marriage and lack of freedom to quit marriage because of social pressure. It is better to get divorced than living in hell.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I am totally sure all of these religions talk about certain restrictions on the women <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Give some quotes and enlighten me.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Why one out of four school girls sexually abused in western countries and become pregnant ? Do you not think it is the over-independence and freedom imposed on these women ? If not, why it is not happening in conservative countries like india ?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
In India 90% cases never get reported. It is a sad state of Indian Woman.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Does the religions talk about men and women living independently ?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why to bring religion, it is personal choice, how he/she want to live?
I think you are totally defensive. I have put forth my views. I am really not able to understand what you are trying to communicate. Pls tell the members what is your viewpoint instead of fully referring to what I say. Probably some of your points does not make any sense to me like how my viewpoints are to you.
IMHO Mudy has answered your points very lucidly. I have had no difficulty comprehending Mudy's posts. And am in broad agreement with Mudy's rejoinders.
You brought forth the breakup of the families in west as a possible pointer to a looming problem for India. That I believe most will be in agreement with. But when you dumped all the responsibility for that failure on women, thats where I think you fell for a fallacy. As Mudy said, family is made of both husband and wife. Why should the restrictions be put only on women?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Amma's keynote address, entitled "Awaken the Universal Motherhood," addressed gender issues directly and profoundly in the context of spirituality and society as a whole: "No authentic religion belittles or denigrates women. For those who have realized God, there is no difference between male and female. The realized ones have equal vision. If anywhere in the world there exist rules that prevent women from enjoying their rightful freedom, rules that obstruct their progress in society, then those are not God's commandments, but are born out of the selfishness of men.
"Which eye is more important, the left or the right? Both are equally important. It is the same with the status of men and women in society. Both should be aware of their unique responsibilities, or dharma. Men and women have to support one another. Only in this way can we maintain the harmony of the world. When men and women become powers that complement each other, and move together with co-operation and mutual respect, they will attain perfection."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
01-05-2005, 03:05 AM (This post was last modified: 01-05-2005, 03:10 AM by Sunder.)
Raja, thanks for initiating a good (and necessary) topic. The whole concept of Independence and whether to 'give' or 'grant' independence to someone is an interesting topic. Independence is never "given". Either you are Independent or you are not. (I shall not go into Vedantic tangent of how Independence is your true nature.)
You quote religion and it's ideas on Independence or Dependence of women. Here, intererestingly you had quoted the Gita. As far as I know, the Gita does not say women should be subservient to men. In Chapter 1, Arjuna is concerned about Kula-stree and then about Varna inter-mixing. Sri Bhagavan in 10:34 mentions that He indeed is 'Shri, Keerthi, and Vakh amongst women.' All the three mentioned are amongst some of the greatest Personalities we have seen. And they were fiercely Independent. Gargi Vachaknavi was a *highly educated* intellectually gifted 'woman' who had challenged a even the great Yagyavalkya in the Brihadaranyaka. She was representing Kashi in an assembly of intellectuals filled with *males*.
Your fear of fragile families is well founded in the wake of a society that seems to be degenerating. Well, every generation since the dawn of time has been bemoaning that it is degenerating. There is nothing new in this.
Raja, your concern about freedom is ill-founded. Independence is not an impediment to a happy family, but a FOUNDATION to one. You have mentioned Independence without addressing the other pillar of Happiness. Along with <b>Independence</b> comes <b>Responsibility.</b>
Be it man or woman, as long as there is freedom without responsibility, there is a high chance of it leading the person astray. Your quotes of statistics about the US or any other part of the world is precisely owing to this.
In India, as in any other part of the world, the concept of marriage does not limit itself to producing babies. A healthy marriage is all about bringing up responsible citizens. It is about sculpting personalities that can make a difference in the world, to themselves and to others. This involves the commitment of both <b>man and woman.</b> Restricting a woman's independence while allowing a man to be irresponsible amounts to bigotry. A woman has traditionally been a housekeeper because men lack the responsibility to change diapers and cook/clean.
I shall now go back historically to see what kind of freedom women had in Bharath.
Take the Ramayana for instance. When Rama was ordered to go into Exile, Matha Janaki wanted to go along. Rama tries to convince her that the forest is a dangerous place, and that she is not used to such dangerous terrain. She retorts saying "Hey Rama, I thought you were a man. But you are just a woman in a man's form." ("Striyam Purusha Vigraham") Yes, she calls Rama by name.
Sri Shankaracharya's SoundaryaLahari begins with a shloka stating as below:
Shiva, without Shakthi's help cannot even move by himself. Hence O divine mother, you are worshipped by Hari, Hara and Brahma..
A marriage will never go wrong because a wife has a brain of her own. Yes, I agree that there are Women's lib members who go to extremes in finding sexist attitude in each and every thing. But this should be taken as an exception and not the rule.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->In India, we have imposed restrictions on women for "smoking" and "drinking". They are not allowed to move around freely and controlled. I feel this control is required. I do not think, a true Indian lover, wish to "smoke" and "drink" with his wife and children ! These areas, I feel, women needs to be controlled.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Please enlighten me as to why men should be allowed to smoke and drink. Is there an advantage for men to smoke or drink? Is there a religious sanction here? Or do you agree with me that Smoking/Drinking should be banned irrespective of the sexes. What goes for the goose should go for the gander too.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Also, the controls imposed on a girl to move around freely, will reduce the probability of having improper sexual relationships.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
With whom? If responsibility was made necessary for men and women, then this scenario will not happen. Right?
With regards to dress code and social conduct, please read Vatsyayana's Kamasutra. It is a snapshot of the society back then. (You can read Ramayana, Mahabharatha too to find out snapshots of the respective times.)
I propose that women and men should have <b>full independence, coupled with responsibility.</b> Every man should understand that family is team work, and that when the harmony in a family is disturbed, the repurcussions are felt for the future generations to come.
First of all, thanks for your detailed reply. You have put forth lot of good points for discussions.
I agree with you in some of the points that you have mentioned.
Pls refer my earlier mails. I have clearly mentioned that âequalityâ in good things is highly appreciated by everybody including all the religions. I do not say in any of my messages that women should not be given freedom and independence in âEducationâ , âCareerâ and all that is related to good outcome.
Also, I did not say that we should not impose any restrictions on men . I have also mentioned in my mail that for a successful family life there are three important factors
1. Mutual understanding between the husband and wife
2. Proper communication
3. Give and take policy
In my previous mail, I have also classified the dowry, cruelty and the other cruelties commited to women as âculprit actâ and whoever involved in it needs to be punished.
While all these are implied, I have taken the topic focussing only on the extent of âWomen independence and freedomâ for a successful nation. Ofcourse, the other points mentioned by you all are also very important and can be discussed in a different forum.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->You have asked me one question:
Why men should be allowed to smoke ?
My answer will be : No.
But I am not discussing in detail on this as the subject is different<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
To summarize, the point I am trying to debate here is limited to the "extent of women independence and freedomâ for a successful family life and good culture of the nation. <i><b>My concern here is, of late, women is taking âindependence and freedomâ for granted and crossing beyond their limits. </b></i>
Sunder, You have mentioned very clearly that women should have âFull freedom coupled with responsibilityâ.
<b>Obviously, I am trying to understand :
What is that responsibility ?
To the best of my knowledge when you define responsibility, there will be an override on the freedom and independence. As per the current scenerio, you will agree, this is not acceptable to women, and that is the reason so many failures in the families.
Let me put this blandly. Do you mean to say:
1. Women have the freedom and independence to have sex with everyone in the society ? If not, will you define this as a rule (or) how will you define ?
2. Women can walk without adequate dresses in the public ? If not, where is the limit ? How will you define?
3. The freedom and independence given to women is not restricted to the interests of the family ? It means, the husband and wife can take their own decisions ? Incase of conflicts, who will take the final call ? Is it again open ended ?</b>
Sunder, you have also quoted verses from Gita. Let me ask you a plain question :
Is not Janaki obey Rama ? She had delivered the responsibilities of a good wife. She did not even look at other men. When Rama suspected her, she did not divorce him. Instead she proved to him that she is a good wife without any blemish. Calling by name is not the big issue. How Janaki called Rama during the normal times ? Overall, if you see , to the best of my understanding, Janaki was submissive to Rama. Probably, you can correct me if I am wrong. I have limited knowledge in the Vedas.
Let us take bible or quran. In Bible , it is cited that ârespect your husband as like Godâ. Ofcourse, it is also mentioned that husband should âunderstand and loveâ his wife. Same way, Quran also clearly mentions that the âheadâ of the family is the husband.
Request you to put forth your views. Once again, thanks for your reply.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->To summarize, the point I am trying to debate here is limited to the "extent of women independence and freedomâ for a successful family life and good culture of the nation. My concern here is, of late, women is taking âindependence and freedomâ for granted and crossing beyond their limits.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Freedom by definition has no limitations. If there are limitations, then it is not called freedom, it is called containment.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What is that responsibility ?
To the best of my knowledge when you define responsibility, there will be an override on the freedom and independence.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Freedom is the ability to exercise one's will without any coercion or constraints. Freedom is the ability to move around unrestricted by 'external' pressures. Responsibility can best be defined as how Accountable one is for their actions. Responsibility and freedom are NOT mutually contradictory. A King has full freedom to exercise his will over his subjects. But he is responsible enough not to kill everyone in his kingdom just because he has the freedom.
I hope this point is clear.
You have posted a few questions which seem to have had my attention.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->1. Women have the freedom and independence to have sex with everyone in the society ?
  If not, will you define this as a rule (or) how will you define ?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes. I honestly believe that any being belonging to the animal kingdom have the freedom to mate with anyone of it's choice. If not, then the process of natural selection would be meaningless.
Just because women have the freedom to mate with anyone of their liking would not mean they would be irresponsible enough to. Sadly, in most cases, women end up in marriages with men they hate to live with and are stuck in marriages that they cannot get out of (and vice versa).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->2. Women can walk without dresses in the public ? If not, where is the limit ? How will you define?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, they CAN walk without dress in public (as do some tribes) and as did our ancestors.. Does this mean they are irresponsible enough to? There again comes the difference between freedom and responsibility. By posing this question, you are strengthening my point and not countering it. Hope you follow this.
Honestly, I would be more worried about men walking about undressed in public. They should be the ones restricted from wearing dabba-kkattu.
(I am sure I know your counter questions to my answers above.) and no, none of the women related to me are irresponsible enough to do any of the above.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->3. The freedom and independence given to women is not restricted to the interests of the family ? It means, the husband and wife can take their own decisions ? Incase of conflicts, who will take the final call ? Is it again open ended ?<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
A free and independent wife (not an arrogant one), would contribute to solving family issues. If there is a conflict in a family, the SANE one will take the final call. And most importantly, the one who is wiser enough to see Dharmic values will have the final say.
Let's say for example, a husband is a chronic alcholic. His wife has a mind of her own and forbids him from drinking. This is a typical family conflict in India.. Here, I would think the final call would be that of the wife and not that of the alcholic husband.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Is not Janaki obey Rama ? She had delivered the responsibilities of a good wife. She did not even look at other men.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, this was Her Impeccable Character. Her freedom was never restricted. Rama never beat his wife or threatened her into submission. She had the freedom of choice.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->When Rama suspected her, she did not divorce him. Instead she proved to him that she is a good wife without any blemish. Calling by name is not the big issue. How Janaki called Rama during the normal times ? Overall, if you take , Janaki is submissive to Rama. Probably, you can correct me if I am wrong. I have limited knowledge in the Vedas.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
First, Ramayana is not part of the Vedas. Second, Janaki Matha was not submissive to Rama, nor was he submissive to her - but they were complementing each other instead of being supplementary of one another. Thurd, Janaki matha called Rama by name at all times (she had used other epithets too.) and finally, <b>Rama did not suspect Janaki nor did He ask Her to prove Herself.</b> This is never in the Original Ramayana. (If you read the Yuddha Kanda in Valmiki Ramayana, Rama tells Janaki that she is free to go wherever she wishes to now that she has been freed from Ravana's clutches. She chooses to go into Agni voluntarily, and she was never asked by Rama.)
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Let us take bible or quran. In Bible also, it is cited that ârespect your husband as like Godâ. Same way quran is also clearly mentions that the âheadâ of the family is the husband.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am sorry, but neither Bible nor Quran has anything to do with the character of Indian culture.
Raja, a responsible couple are the happiest ones. If I force my wife to be submissive, then some day down the lane I would wonder if she is with me because she loves me or because she fears me. If she lives by my wishes, then she is not living HER life, she would end up living MY life, which is not what I desire.
I have one question for you. Would you force your wife into submission or have a meaningful discussion when there are family issues..?
You are trying to equate human beings to animals. Animals do not have the sense and because of which they do not have any concern on Sex, dresses etc. Once we say that human beings are equal to "animals", then we can talk about "full independence and freedom". NO LIMITS ABSOLUTELY. I see human beings differently.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Freedom by definition has no limitations. If there are limitations, then it is not called freedom, it is called containment. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
There has to be a balance. My argument is that it should be a "Contained freedom".
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Raja:
1. Women have the freedom and independence to have sex with everyone in the society ?
 If not, will you define this as a rule (or) how will you define ?
Sunder:
Yes. I honestly believe that any being belonging to the animal kingdom have the freedom to mate with anyone of it's choice. If not, then the process of natural selection would be meaningless.
Just because women have the freedom to mate with anyone of their liking would not mean they would be irresponsible enough to. Sadly, in most cases, women end up in marriages with men they hate to live with and are stuck in marriages that they cannot get out of (and vice versa).
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is the argument posed by the westerners. You will agree how their life is spoiled now. You can see young school girls morally abused (one out of four school children) and getting pregnant . 60-70% of the families getting seperated ! Tragedic diseases getting spread !! Total "Moral degenerosity".
Can I ask you one simple question :
One day, if your girl child, probably 15 years, comes back to you saying that she is pregnant, how will you feel ?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Raja:
2. Women can walk without dresses in the public ? If not, where is the limit ? How will you define?
Sunder:
Yes, they CAN walk without dress in public (as do some tribes) and as did our ancestors.. Does this mean they are irresponsible enough to? There again comes the difference between freedom and responsibility. By posing this question, you are strengthening my point and not countering it. Hope you follow this.
Honestly, I would be more worried about men walking about undressed in public. They should be the ones restricted from wearing dabba-kkattu.
(I am sure I know your counter questions to my answers above.) and no, none of the women related to me are irresponsible enough to do any of the above.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Honestly, I am not going to debate on going back to the nudist culture.
Probably, you have not seen such lowzy scenes. In major cities in india ( For ex. in Bangalore) you can see girls walking with almost everything seen outside !!! Probably because they are not aware how low and crazy they look when they wear such dresses !!!
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I have one question for you. Would you force your wife into submission or have a meaningful discussion when there are family issues..? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is a good question. I will see this through the 3 points that I have mentioned earlier :
1.Proper communication -- Try to mutually communicate the issues and have a good understanding
2. Mutual understanding --- Try to close this with the mutual understanding between us
3. Give and take policy --- If it cannot be closed by mutual understanding, See whether one of us can sacrifice their viewpoint and allow the interest of the other without any damage to the underlying fundamentals .
4. Final Call --- If by all these, we are not able to arrive at any solution, I will take the final call as the HEAD of the family. <b>Here comes what I call "submission".</b>
<!--QuoteBegin-Raja+Jan 5 2005, 12:55 PM-->QUOTE(Raja @ Jan 5 2005, 12:55 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Can I ask you one simple question :
One day, if your girl child, probably 15 years, comes back to you saying that she is pregnant, how will you feel ? <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Raja, now I see where you are coming from.. I shall leave it to others to answer your argument satisfactorily.. however, like I suspected, you have asked me a question which involves a female relative of mine (in this case a hypothetical daughter.) Here is my answer.
All through your post you had conveniently missed out the RESPONSIBILTY part that I was harping about.
If my daughter came home and announced she were pregnant, my first question would be "Were you responsible in your actions?" If she were responsible, then the situation would not happen. If it is not consentual,the irresponsible MALE can be brought to his knees before the law for raping a minor.
You still fail to see the point and think that all teen-pregnancies are caused by magic. It involves a conniving male too (who is irresponsible).
I thought I could make you see my point, but looks like it's more than my cup of tea.
Raja, What you will do?
One day, if your girl child, probably 15 years, comes back to you saying that she is pregnant, how will you feel ?
What is your reaction when you see someone in see through dress or in covered dress?
What you think when you see woman covered with Burka?
What is your reaction when you see woman in work place or your wife decides to go to different city for education?
Raja wrote: <!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->4. Final Call --- If by all these, we are not able to arrive at any solution, I will take the final call as the HEAD of the family. Here comes what I call "submission".<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
"Submission"..., where have I heard this word before...hmmm....some european painter named van Gogh comes to mind, a movie..., a murder....also that "Islam" in arabic means "Submission"...
Twinkle twinkle "Starry Night"
How I wonder at this sight
Up above mere Indians so high
A "true Indian" in the sky
<!--QuoteBegin-Raja+Jan 5 2005, 03:25 AM-->QUOTE(Raja @ Jan 5 2005, 03:25 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> 1.Proper communication -- Try to mutually communicate the issues and have a good understanding
2. Mutual understanding --- Try to close this with the mutual understanding between us
3. Give and take policy --- If it cannot be closed by mutual understanding, See whether one of us can sacrifice their viewpoint and allow the interest of the other without any damage to the underlying fundamentals .
4. Final Call --- If by all these, we are not able to arrive at any solution, I will take the final call as the HEAD of the family. <b>Here comes what I call "submission".</b>
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If first 3 you've listed are firm then there really isn't the need for one to 'submit' to the other, fourth point is redundant. Consider a relationship between two friends where there'll be agreements and disagreements where the two will find a way out no matter how contentious the issue is. Submissions of one or not might be good for the bloated egos onlee.
Disclaimer: I am the boss of my house <!--emo&:rocker--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rocker.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='rocker.gif' /><!--endemo--> and I have wife's permission to say so <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You mentioned Soundarya Lahiri. I had read somewhere that Vivekachudamani says that it is rare to get a human life and rarer still is the male body ? What is the context ? I can easily infer from the above that it is equally rare to get a female human body (assuming sex ratio of 1) but just wanted to extract some knowledge out of guroos here.. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Viren,
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I am the boss of my house <!--emo&:rocker--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rocker.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='rocker.gif' /><!--endemo--> and I have wife's permission to say so <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
psssst....... me too <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
You mentioned Soundarya Lahiri. I had read somewhere that Vivekachudamani says that it is rare to get a human life and rarer still is the male body ? What is the context ? I can easily infer from the above that it is equally rare to get a female human body (assuming sex ratio of 1) but just wanted to extract some knowledge out of guroos here.. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks Rajesh ji,
In the VivekaChudamani, Verse 2, Sri Shankaracharya uses a moha-mudhgaram (a sledgehammer to break the delusion) by stating as follows..
For all beings a human birth is difficult to obtain, more so is a male body; rarer than that is Brahmanahood; rarer still is the attachment to the path of Vedic religion; higher than this is erudition in the scriptures; discrimination between the Self and not-Self, Realisation, and continuing in a state of identity with Brahman â these come next in order. (This kind of) Mukti (Liberation) is not to be attained except through the well-earned merits of a hundred crore of births.
(http://www.celextel.org/ebooks/adi_sanka...damani.htm) <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
When I read this (back in the 90's) it felt like this stanza was written just for me. The effect of this particular stanza was <b>electrifying</b> to say the least, and left me with a sense of vairagya which seems to have gotten dormant over time.
My take on this stanza is as follows:
The Chidabhasa is nothing but jeeva, which is a reflection of Brahman on Avidya. For the Chidabhasa (Consciousness) to manifest itself in a body is rare. In a layperson's language, it is better to be born as a living being than to be born as a stone or a rock. <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<b>jantuunaaM nara-janma dur-labham.</b> Thus, of all beings, it is better to be born in a Human body (as humanbeings have the capability of making spiritual pursuits and philosophical quest on the Origin of the Universe compared to other beings.)
<b>puMstvaM tato viprataa.</b> Pumsatvam means being a Man. Having a moustache does not make a man. There are certain qualities that makes a Man, like 'Standing up for oneself', 'being resilient at times of happiness and pain', 'keeping one's words' and 'protecting those who count on him'. A physical male who is a coward is not really considered a male (Klaibhyam maasmagama partha. - Srimadh Bhagavadh Geetha.) Pumsah is male, and napumsah is eunuch. Sri Shankara says it is better to be born a male (not many physical-males are really Men.)
Amongst men, Viprathaa is considered higher. Viprah is a learned one who comes from a decent upbringing. A Characterless man from a brahminic family cannot be considered a viprah.
<b>tasmaad vaidika-dharma-maarga-parataa</b> Among those men who are of great character, the ones who have faith in the Vedas are considered higher. Here, the faith is not blind faith, but faith with an quest to learn and understand the Brahman that the Vedas talk about. Great character with no faith in vedas is like unseasoned food. It satisfies the hunger, but does not taste good.
<b>vidvattvam asmaat param.</b> Better still is for the man of faith to not just remain faithful, but to understand and excel in the knowledge offered by the Vedas. Faith without knowledge serves no purpose.
<b>aatmaan'aatma-vivechanaM</b> Of those men of good character who have excelled in Vedic knowledge, the best one is he who understands the difference between the Eternal Self and the ephemeral universe.
<b>svanubhavo brahm'aatmanaa saMsthitiH</b> Of those who can discriminate as above, he who Realizes the Self is indeed the HIGHEST of them all. For it is HE who finally attains the state that is beyond birth, manhood, faith, and discrimination.
<b>muktir no shata-janma-koTi-su-kR^taiH puNyair vinaa labhyate.</b> Such a liberation (i.e. Self Realization) does not come without great deeds committed in a billion lifetimes.
PS: There will be questions whether women are unfit for self-realization. There is no statement that says so. A male has more social liberties (and no monthly physical discomforts) that women face. Thus it is easy for a kaupeena-vantah (wearing nothing but a loin cloth) to roam around as a parivrajaka (wandering monk). Thus being born as a man may be a blessing for aspirants as they have a starting advantage.
In the meantime I think the title of this thread is loaded to begin with. I am going to make it more generic. Let me know if you guys still think its inappropriate.
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->