>As regards 'thaali' there have been some discussions before. The 'thaali' >is not mentioned in any epics, neither the Ramayana or Mahabharat mentioned it. In fact the Ramyana clearly says Rama wore a ring and Sita a >head ornament as symbolic of their marriage. No problems with equality >there!! Perhaps the thaali was among the first symbols of gender >oppression and self made rituals.
>Malathi
" thaali system" is practicsed only in south india and hence naturally Rama did not tie thali to sita.
Thaali is not a gender oppression. Thaali is worn by woman and " metti" by man to differentiate between married and unmarried.
When a married woman goes outside, her head will look downwards and other gents will recogonize her as married by seeing her thaali at her neck and as a mark of respect, they will not "venture" out any thing
when a married man walks outside, other women will see his "metti" at his leg and will recogonize as married.
West is not as in physically west, its a western concept. Process could be unique to the place but concept is of question.
Kovalan Kannagi is pure jain writing and a trend breaker / introducer. (No wonder our earlier guys fought tooth n nail against these rules).
Getting back to Ramayana: It was actually a swayamvara, the 'function' was the binding of human relation,divine love played its game in between making it as a 1-1 connection. His brothers just followed the game.
If you use a couple of 'what if' scenarios in these areas, you will feel that its mostly according to the nature of people then.
Sir... author is jain not the characters. Like the statement 'you are what you eat', an author connects various views of their life/visions/aspirations/hopes and society to map the creation in writing.
Actually the 1-1 marriage per the Ramayana was highlighted only by Kambar. Valmiki does not attribute this as a virtue to Sri Rama at all anywhere.
Generally speaking one man to one woman relationship is not deemed a virtue anywhere in the puranas even though it existed. I am not that well informed on buddhist/jain traditions with regards to marraige, would be interesting to look into that. It is a known fact that Gautama Buddha had only one wife in Yasodhara.
It is not clear how we evolved from puranic times but durign recent times atleast, the British introduction of monogamy was largely due to streamlining of rules around property, inheritance and so on. If one looks back into ancestry far enough there will be atleast one big mahabharat type of fight in almost every family where the multiple wives of the patriarchial head and their children fought over property with one of them gaining it.
Ok, this is a very valid point of inducing monogamy by british for streamlining property rules.
Looks like the 1 child per family will be an eventual force for the property regulations :-)
oru vithathila partha, vellai karan sonna thaan mann asai, ponn asai, penn asai venam nu solluvom pola irukku :-)
The use of thee as a binder for any emotional value was mostly used during rig veda, agni being the deva associated. Somewhere from the 9th BC and Jain history is dated to the same age.
It is remarkable that the jain base philosophy absorbs vedic thoughts and added many parameters surrounding that.
But then if they are practically from same foundation, why did the alwars / nayanmars fight the tradition ?
So how did the 'metti' system stop? As far as we know no married male wears a 'metti' nowadays. A one sided system is gender oppression, no matter how much meaning we attach to it.
why dont you work that out at home and get back, may be we can use your case as template and approach our homes too :-)
> > When a married woman goes outside, her head will look downwards and other gents will recogonize her as married by seeing her thaali at her neck and as a mark of respect, they will not "venture" out any thing
Enna kodumai saravanan,ippadi panna neraya road accidents aagum, insurance would be a nightmare :-) Apuram metti / thali design la id card / finger print scanner ellam varum... kadavule... :)
nallaa chonneenga sir... but why stop with metti alone...
imagine "metti oli" serial title song la instead of women wearing metti.. a lady puts metti on her husbands finger... nenaichu paakkave nallaa thaanyaa irukku...maamiyaa kodumaiyila marumagalukku badhilaa marumagan mookai sindhikinu irundhaa evvalavu nalla irukkum....
let we , men- fight for our rights... pudhusaa oru yahoo group aaramikkalaamaa.....
"mettiyaal madhiyizhandhor group".. title superaaa???
>So how did the 'metti' system stop? As far as we know no married male >wears a 'metti' nowadays. A one sided system is gender oppression, no >matter how much meaning we attach to it.
Now a days, many things are not visible.After some centuries even thaali syatem may vanish. Would we say thaali system was not existing?
Many systems have stopped over the period of time for one or other reason.
It is not one sided system. It is both sides.
Muslims women wear burqa and not men? Can we say boldly to muslim gathering that it is oppression?
Woman gives birth undergoing delivery troubles. Can we say it is one sided and hence oppression by God?
>Thaali is not a gender oppression. Thaali is worn by woman and " metti" by man to differentiate between married and unmarried.
>When a married woman goes outside, her head will look downwards and other gents will recogonize her as married by seeing her thaali at her neck and >as a mark of respect, they will not "venture" out any thing
>when a married man walks outside, other women will see his "metti" at his >leg and will recogonize as married.
>All rituals have deep meaning
I was just recollecting old Kanna dasan song in a Tamil film narrating this old tamil custom in a simple language
Let me meet some pundits this week and get the mantras used during the marriage.
The one at the time of kanyadhan is from Ramayan - "Imam Seetha Mama Sudha' is what dasarath told to Ram.
The Mangalyam Dantunanena is defenetly not Vedic.
I was told there is actually a vedic Mantra " which states that, please take my Girl and grow my Lineage. Since i dont have a son, get me a grand son who will do my last rites." This is what recited at the time of Panigrahanam.
let me check. Let me find out about the mantras of Thali.
I also infer that it says the bride has been the wife of many including the Gods, and now is offered as your wife. Some of these not many women with self-esteem would accept. The instance is not isolated to marriage. Even during funeral rites and during anniversaries, there begins a mantra "Enme Mata", which states, "If my mother has gone astray, let these offerings reach the biological father rather than the person it is performed for". This statement is pathetic.
I dont understand Sanskrit, however few of my relatives, well versed, typically help in tailoring these out. So they discuss with the master of ceremonies on the inclusions and exclusions.
The mantras have been static over a period, which was earlier being updated or made relevant in social terms. Now the content remains static, however the time available for ceremonies determine the priorities of sections to be used.
It is 'Iyam Seeta' not 'Imam Seeta'. The mantra 'Sarva Mangala Mangalye..another one chanted during the thaali ceremony refers to the Goddess Devi as the one 'married' (in this sense one who is connected to all things sacred. It has nothing to do with a yellow thread on a lady's neck.
If you ask pundits the convenential answer is mroe than likely to justify the practice. The point of the discussion as Ravi said has to do with the one sided nature of the contract. In more practical terms dont use it or use it both ways.
>> If my mother has gone astray, let these offerings reach the biological father rather than the person it is performed for". This statement is pathetic.
Why so? Mantras are energy invoking incantations, they are an 'asset' and assets need to be transferred.
Points to be noted is a. the speaker is talking / referring from the 3rd person b. the very possibility of a woman choosing a different person of her mind is taken into account. c. biological father statement, which means that this could be an option of choice for the person performing. A woman could have had another family yet not gone astray.
I dont see anything wrong with it. Many of these ground breaking rules created are the ones that change our karma in a way it is supposed to not be, like my acharya used to say, the rule of the supreme nature is not always the same of the rule of the king.
Savithri story for example, her love was so damn strong that she had the energy to bring back a soul from dead, just imagine if savithri had not loved her husband and some one forcibly married her... i reckon she would be more than glad to offer the hubby as bait and walk out of a disaster campaign...
This happens at times, when we make astrology matchings, our current scheme of life does not accommodate the concept of love or women privilege for their choices. If there is no love in a relation, the cosmic elements would function as they were supposed to and cause immense impact in the individual's life. Bhakti / saranagathi can help with people is nothing but undiluted strong & pure love that can/will change course of one's destiny.... not laws as made by a religious unit... All mantras can only help u to conquer the deva loka whatever (I personally think body purification)... but only divine/pure love can bring the supreme cosmic energy closer to the jeevatma.
1. The Pundits i am going to ask are not conventional. will give a very detailed answer. There is a veda patasala on advance course near my house where i got amny revolutionary ideas. Some you know.( my first article)
aama sir... nambo oor la rama irunthar nu sonna illa nu solringa, illena Rama was arya nu solringa (aryan with a beach tan ;)) Ravana tamil nu oru side bit vere... Thailand la free immigration pona kooda ippadi solringale ... nyayama?
dear sankaranarayanan good morning in my experience my friend when his marriage time he was periyar katchiyil irundhan appo avan appaavidam suyamariyathai kalyanam thaan vendum enakku enraan. aanal his father refused and made his regular marriage as thaali and agni valam malar maalai ellam vaithu thaan. aanal en friend in magalukku ippo ivan sattam thane yenda marupadiyum nee kalyanam seyythathau polave un magalukkum thaali manavarai agni valam ellam seyyarayye nee un kalyanathappa suya mariyathai kalyanam vendum enraya eppa un soll thane un veetil yen palaya murai padi seuikirai yendral sirupp avvlothaan. ok ellaam sari ethu irunthaalum illavittalum yenna mudhal iravu undaa illaya?
Please quit generalising..i can understand sanskrit reasonably well, in my home we were taught meanings of most mantras that are commonly used (my sister is a sanskrit pundit).
A marriage that is not sentimental around thaali does not automatically become a Periyar style marriage. I do not wish to address other stuff that this guy below mentioned - yaarum engeyum pogalai - every marriage in every faith and tenement involves an oath, not just 'hindu marriage' or 'south indian thaali' (I am reminded of food :)) Next shall we talk gujarati or rajasthani thaali...mmmmm:))
Can i please request you and other friends to keep in mind our non tamil readers and try to keep exchanges in english please. if you quoting inscriptions or mantras - take time to try and translate for our non tamil friends as well.
>There are two aspects to any religion - one is what it is in theory, another is what it is in practice.There is no religion that is free of the >big wide gap that separates the two. The same religion you say that accords 'more authority' to women is what shaved 15 year old widows and >sat them in dark rooms for a life time, glorified sati and twisted all practices including karmic rites for parents with daughters and marriage >symbols to be one sided and suiting segments of population. We must not hesitate to see the gap between theory and practice or else it is >something that will never be bridged.
>Malathi
Whatever the pracices you mentioned above were not belonging to any religion, say Hinduism. It is the practice of some community.
Widows' heads were shaved in brahmin community who constitute a small % in the Hindu religion.
Sati practice was there among Rajputs in Rajasthan and again they constitute only a % of the HINDU religion.In south india this practice was not there.
Also there were reasons why it was practiced among Rajputs/Kings. When enemey kings invade and caputure the Rajputs, they take away the women/girls of the Rajputs and made as sex slaves for them and these women undergo various tortures. So as soon as Women from Rajput/King family hear that their husbands are defeated, they self immolate to avoid sexual/slavery harasment from enemy kings.
This practice to some extent was followed in the down line citizens also to avoid harasment from influential males (like zamindhar) from the village for these widows.
The religion did not say you commit suicide after your husband's death.It is the practice that is followed in some region.Again the religion did not stop this practice. It is people like Rajaram Mohanrai who highlighted there was no such need of sati and it has been abolished
Paramacharya did not get into motor vehicles either..
Easwaran did give his explanation as well.
"" ... Also there were reasons why it was practiced among Rajputs/Kings. When enemey kings invade and caputure the Rajputs, they take away the women/girls of the Rajputs and made as sex slaves for them and these women undergo various tortures. So as soon as Women from Rajput/King family hear that their husbands are defeated, they self immolate to avoid sexual/slavery harasment from enemy kings... "
thanks for the clarification. my mail was just for seeking clarification and in no way to demean the great saint for whom i have great respect and devotion..
reg. jayakanthan book, please explain the essence.. padichcha enakku puriyaadhu.. as u know arivu mattu dhaan enakku...
but dont mistake me.. ennoda budduhi ippadi yosikka solludhu...
why would a widow only ask for following the footsteps of the husband.. why not remarriage???
They used sense and logic over blind practices. History and religion have to be studied in sync to eliminate crazy practices.
> > Widows' heads were shaved in brahmin community who constitute a small % in the Hindu religion.
a. correction - South indian brahmins - are a small % of Hindu religion. And even otherwise, they are very respected, they do something - it gets reflected in the society very strongly. Most of the common man never had the ability to understand religion / practice, leave alone sanskrit. God's wrath was something people were always afraid of. Infact, some of these crazy & stupid traditions brought about the advent of conversions. Either ways, brahmin women are a very important part of the society, a young widow (or even an old widow) shaving her head etc is not best practices - esp when the other community is observing.
Nobility is not a birth right, it is defined by one's actions. However, when a predefined noble performs an act, it was assumed as the practice.
> > Sati practice was there among Rajputs in Rajasthan and again they constitute only a % of the HINDU religion.In south india this practice was not there.
Udan kattai was also prevalent in South. Originally, it was something the woman chose, probably because she felt her life was void without her love. The advent of war / sexual slavery would have some of the queens opt for this option. Again, karpu being a physical thought for a lot of people - even during those era's.
Anyway, the history of marriage is way beyond the realms of rajputs or widow shaving. By the time we got to this, we were sooo deep in crap already.